Orissa High Court
Kishan Lal Agrawal vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party on 9 September, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.751 of 2025
Kishan Lal Agrawal ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Debi Prasad Dhal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satyajit Mohapatra, Adv.
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Ms. B.K. Sahu, AGA
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.09.2025
Order No.
07. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. D.P. Dhal, learned senior counsel for the Petitioner
as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as
well as the prayer made therein.
3. By filing of the present application under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., the Petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of
this Court to challenge order dated 09.05.2024 passed by the learned
J.M.F.C., Kantabanji in CMC No.53 of 2023, which has been
confirmed by the judgment dated 22.01.2025 of the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Kantabanji in Criminal Revision No.4 of 2024,
which arises out of G.R. Case No.307 of 2023 and the same
corresponds to Kantabanji P.S. Case No.203 of 2023.
4. Mr. Dhal, learned senior counsel for the Petitioner at the
outset contended that the Petitioner seeks to challenge order dated
22.01.2025 passed by the revisional authority confirming the order
dated 09.05.2024 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji. On an
application filed by the Petitioner under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. with
a prayer to release his machinery which have been seized by the
Police during investigation. Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner
at the outset contended that while conducting investigation on the
basis of the FIR lodged on 21.07.2023, Kantabanji P.S. Case No.203
of 2023 was registered for alleged commission of offence punishable
under Sections 286 & 34 of IPC read with Sections 3 & 4 of the
Orissa Explosive Substances Act along with Section 5 of the Orissa
Fire Works and Louder Speaker (Regulation) Act, 1958. He further
contended that as per the allegation in the FIR the Petitioner was
found to be manufacturing fire crackers without having any
explosive licence for such manufacturing. Although it was
contended that the Petitioner had the licence for display and sale of
fire crackers, however, he had no licence for manufacturing of such
fire crackers. Upon getting information of such manufacturing the
Police team raided the godown of the present Petitioner and the
machineries which are engaged in the manufacturing of the fire
crackers have been seized.
5. While this was the position, the Petitioner moved an
application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. with a specific prayer for
release of 12 numbers of manufacturing machines and other articles
in his favour and for an order to unseal the godown of the Petitioner.
Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended
that the godown which has been sealed along with the machineries
inside such godown was used for various purposes, however, the
Police has seized the entire godown and the same has been sealed.
As a result of which, the Petitioner is unable to use his own godown.
The application, which was filed to unseal the godown and to release
12 numbers of machineries, has been rejected by the learned trial
Court vide order dated 09.05.2024 in CMC No.53 of 2023. Being
aggrieved by such order, the Petitioner preferred a revision before
the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kantabanji in Criminal Revision
No.4 of 2024. The learned Revisional Court vide judgment dated
22.01.2025 rejected the revision petition and thereby confirmed the
order passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji. On perusal of the
order passed by the learned Revisional Court, it is observed that the
learned Court below has passed a detailed order discussing the
factual background in detail. The learned Revisional Court had come
to a conclusion that no illegalities were found in the order of the
learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji, therefore, the learned Revisional Court
has declined to interfere with the order passed by the learned
J.M.F.C., Kantabanji. Being aggrieved by the orders passed by the
learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji which was confirmed as a revision by
the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kantabanji, the Petitioner has
approached this Court by filing the present application. In course of
argument, learned senior counsel for the Petitioner submitted that
since the entire godown of the Petitioner has been sealed, the
Petitioner is suffering huge financial loss as he is unable to carry on
his business activities. He further contended that apart from the
alleged activities as mentioned in the FIR, the Petitioner has other
business activities for which he requires his godown. It was also
specifically argued that although the case is of the year 2023, till
date neither the trial has commenced nor the Petitioner is being
allowed to use his godown which is under the lock and key of the
local Police. He further suggested that the local Police is using one
of the premises of the Petitioner as their godowns which is nearby
the godown of present Petitioner. Therefore, the 12 numbers of
machineries which have been seized in connection with the
manufacturing of fire crackers can very well be shifted to the
godown used by the local Police and consequentially the godown of
the Petitioner can very well be unsealed, so that the Petitioner can
utilize the same for his business activities.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supported the
order passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji, which was
confirmed in revision by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge,
Kantabanji. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the State
contended that the learned Courts below have not committed any
illegality in passing the impugned orders which is the subject matter
of challenge in the present application. He further specifically
argued that since the Petitioner did not have any licence to
manufacture the fire crackers, the Police have rightly and lawfully
seized the machineries during the raid. It was also contended that the
learned Courts below have taken note of the aforesaid facts and
accordingly the application filed by the Petitioner under Section 457
of Cr.P.C. has been rightly rejected. On such ground, learned
counsel for the State contended that the application filed by the
Petitioner is devoid of merit and accordingly the same should be
dismissed.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts
as well as materials on record, further on a close scrutiny of the
orders passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji on 09.05.2024 as
well as the learned Revisional Court on 22.01.2025, this Court
observes that while passing such order both the learned Courts have
not taken into consideration the fact that the machineries, which
have been seized, have been kept in the godown of the Petitioner and
the entire godown has been sealed. As a result of which, the
Petitioner has a genuine grievance that he is unable to utilize his own
godown. The aforesaid facts, as it appears were never brought on
record while the learned Courts below was considering the
application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. In view of the aforesaid
position, this Court, while disposing of the present application,
grants liberty to the Petitioner to move an application before the
learned trial Court with a specific prayer to unseal the godown by
shifting the 12 numbers of machineries which were seized in
connection with the present case to a nearby godown, which is used
by the local Police to store the seized articles including the fire
crackers seized from the present Petitioner. In such eventuality, the
learned trial Court after considering the submissions likely to be
advanced by the learned counsels from both sidess pass an order in
accordance with law. This Court further observes that the learned
trial Court while passing such order shall make an endeavor to
ensure that the Petitioner is allowed to use his godown.
8. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the CRLMC
application stands disposed of.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Page 5 of 5.
