Mansukh Popatbhai Sangani vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7244 Guj

                                                                                  NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/SCR.A/11310/2023                             ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

                                                                                   undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (POSSESSION OF MUDDAMAL)
                      NO. 11310 of 2023

==========================================================
                          MANSUKH POPATBHAI SANGANI
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SHUBHAM B DAVE(12229) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BV PANDYA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE

                                Date : 03/10/2023

                                 ORAL ORDER

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent State.

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 17.05.2023 passed by the learned 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.1606 of 2022 and to direct the Court below to hand-over custody of muddamal cash amount of Rs.3.50 Lacs and Camera of Kodak Company to the petitioner, which were seized in connection with the complaint being C.R. No.I-65 of 2009 registered with Kalavad Police Station.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that on 21.07.2009 a

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/11310/2023 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

complaint being C.R. No. I-65 of 2009 was registered with Kalavad Police Station for offences u/s. 302, 364, 365, 114, 120(B) and 34 of IPC against the brother of the petitioner, named Dharmendra @ Dhamo Popatbhai Sangani and six other co-accused. During the course of investigation, the petitioner herein was called by the police and cash amount of Rs.3.50 Lacs and a Camera of Kodak Company came to be seized from the petitioner on the pretext that the said amount & article was raised from alleged contract killing.

2.1 Trial was initiated and vide judgment and order dated 25.03.2015, the Sessions Court concerned convicted the brother of the petitioner and six other co-accused in Sessions Case Nos.132/2009 and 59/2010.

2.2 The accused-convicts challenged the judgment and order of conviction and sentence before this Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 582/2015 and 35/2016. The said appeals were allowed by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 08.06.2020 and all the accused-convicts came to be acquitted.

2.3 The petitioner, thereafter, preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.1606/2022 before the Court below seeking release of the muddamal cash and camera. However, the said

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/11310/2023 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

application came to be rejected by way of the impugned order. Hence, this petition.

3. It is submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner was not an accused in the FIR which was filed against the brother of the petitioner and six other co-accused nor any role was attributed to him in the charge-sheet. Ultimately, the brother of the petitioner and six other co- accused have been acquitted by the Division Bench of this Court. The cash and article were seized only on a presumption that they were proceeds of alleged contract killing. However, when all the convicts-accused have been acquitted, the Court below ought to have released the muddamal cash and articles in favour of the petitioner. It was, accordingly, urged to allow the present petition.

4. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and perused the material on record. Having gone through the impugned order, it appears that the main ground on which the Court below declined the request of the petitioner is that one of the co- accused is absconding and trial is pending against him. The petitioner herein was not an accused in the impugned FIR nor any role was attributed to him in the charge-sheet. The Court below declined the request of the petitioner only on the presumption that the amount / article might have a co-relation

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/11310/2023 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

with the facts of the FIR. However, such presumption is without any basis and there is nothing to suggest that the amount / article was proceeds of any contract killing, particularly, when all the convict-accused have been acquitted by this Court and there is nothing to suggest the order of acquittal has been stayed or interfered with by the higher forum. Considering the above aspects, this Court is of the opinion that the muddamal could be released in favour of the petitioner subject to certain conditions.

5. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.05.2023 passed by the learned 3 rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.1606 of 2022 is quashed and set aside. The Court below is directed to release the muddamal cash amount of Rs.3.50 Lacs (Rupees Three lakhs fifty thousand) and Kodak Camera in favour of the petitioner on condition that the petitioner furnishes Solvency equivalent to the amount of muddamal to the satisfaction of the Court below. On fulfillment of the said condition and after due verification, the muddamal cash and article be released in favour of the petitioner. With the above direction, the petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

(SAMIR J. DAVE,J)

PRAVIN KARUNAN