Mantosh Paul vs The State Of Assam
2025 Latest Caselaw 1650 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Mantosh Paul vs The State Of Assam on 31 July, 2025

                                                                            Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010055282024




                                                                     undefined

                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                    Case No. : Crl.Pet./298/2024

            MANTOSH PAUL
            R/O LUMDING TOWN, P.S.-LUMDING



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. T SOM, MR. P TELI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA

                                             ORDER

Date : 31.07.2025

Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the petitioner.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 23.11.2023 passed by the learned JMFC, Hojai whereby, the application of the petitioner for zimma of the seized articles was rejected.

Perusal of the impugned order goes to show that the only reason why the learned Page No.# 2/2

JMFC, Hojai rejected the petition for zimma was that as per the report of the Officer-In- Charge of Lumding Police Station, the seized electronic devices were sent to Cyber cell of Superintendent of Police, Hojai to extract the offensive crime data which required for the purpose of further investigation.

From the above, it is quite clear that the seized articles i.e. the electronic devices were in the custody of the Cyber cell of the S.P. Hojai and were required for the purpose of investigation by extracting the data contained therein.

It is also clear that for the said reason it was not possible at that stage to grant the custody of the said articles to the petitioner. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned JMFC, Hojai.

Although the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to alleged violation of Section 457 of Cr.P.C. as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai -vs- State of Gujrat reported in AIR (2002) SC 638, I do not find any force in the said submission in view of the reason cited by the learned JMFC for rejection of the zimma application.

The aforesaid impugned order was passed on 23.11.2023 and more than one and half year have elapsed since then and it is therefore expected that the said aspect of the investigation would be over by now and therefore, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the learned Court of the Magistrate at Hojai for zimma of the said articles.

In the event of such application being made, the learned Magistrate shall dispose of the same as per law.

With the above observation, the criminal petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant