Vinod Kumar Goyal vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5597 Chatt

                                   1

                                                             NAFR

         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                           CRMP No. 1454 of 2022
     • Vinod Kumar Goyal S/o Late Omprakash Goyal Aged About 41
       Years R/o 168, Netam Para, Village Urmal, Tahsil Mainpur,
       District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh
                                                        ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
     • State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police
       Of Police Station Devbhog, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh
                                                     ---- Respondent

For Petitioner : Shri Sanjeev Verma, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Smt. Seema Dixit, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi

Order On Board 07.9.2022.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of direction to the learned trial Court to decide his application, filed under Section 452 of the CrPC, as early as possible.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the year 2001, offence of dacoity was committed in the house of father of the petitioner and in this regard, FIR was lodged by father of the petitioner. Pursuant to that, Session Case No.468/2001 was filed, wherein, accused persons have been convicted. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid case, various golden and silver ornaments and other articles were looted, which were seized by the Police and with regard to handing over those articles, application under Section 452 CrPC has been filed by the petitioner on 30.7.2015 as his father died in the year 2011. Despite that, aforesaid application of the petitioner, has not been decided till date. Certified copy of order sheets of 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur have also been filed in this regard and the case is pending as un-numbered case, hence, the trial Court may be directed to decide the application filed by the petitioner under Section 452 of CrPC expeditiously.

3. Learned counsel for the State extended her support to the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Considered the submission and perused the documents including certified copy of the order sheets of concerned un- numbered case, which is pending before 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur.

5. Perusal of the order sheets would go to show that aforesaid application has been filed on 30.7.2015, despite that the application has not been decided yet. It seems that since judgment dated 14th August, 2003 has been passed in Session Trial No.468/2001 (State of Chhattisgarh vs. Maniram & Ors.) and consequent appeal is pending before the High Court along with original record of the Session Trial No.468/2001, therefore, without aforesaid record, the learned Court below could not decide the application of the petitioner. In the aforesaid situation, it is not understood as to why the learned Court below has not sent letter of requisition to the High Court for calling the original record of Session Case No.468/2001.

6. If the Court below is not able to decide the application without original record, then it is directed that the Court below shall send letter of requisition for calling the original record of Session Case No.468/2001 to the High Court and after receiving the record, the Court below may decide the application of the petitioner filed under Section 452 CrPC, as early as possible.

7. With aforesaid observation and direction, instant petition is disposed of finally.

SD/-

(N.K. Chandravanshi) JUDGE Bini