2025:JHHC:19520 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 1389 of 2023 Pappu Choudhary @ Pappu Mahtha, Son of Kamdev Mahtha, aged about 44 years, Resident of House No.86, Ghidni P.O. & P.S- Ghidni, District Deoghar …… Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2.Kusho Mahto, aged about 52 years, Son of Late Abhiram Mahto, Resident of Hudagada, P.O. & P.S-Saraikela , District Chaibasa, West Singhbhum ……. Opp. Parties --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, APP ----------- ORAL ORDER IN COURT 15/Dated:16th July, 2025 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.05.2023 passed by Sri Manoj Kumar Prajapati, learned A.C.J.M, Deoghar by which prayer for release of semi-automatic pistol bearing Sr. No.03/20-21, UIN (I) No.163171003162372021 of the petitioner was rejected in Misc. Criminal Application No.3474 of 2022. 2. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned APP. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the F.I.R was registered against the petitioner but later on the police submitted Final Form in favour of the petitioner on 02.05.2024. It is submitted that the petitioner has got his own licensee pistol bearing License Sr. No.03/20-21, UIN (I) No.163171003162372021 and hence the pistol may be released in his favour in the light of the judgment reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 (Sunderbhai Ambala Desai vrs. State of Gujarat). 2025:JHHC:19520 2 4. It is submitted that if the pistol is kept in the Police Station for a long period then it will be damaged and it will be useless and lose its worthiness. It is submitted that pistol is required for the safety and the petitioner is ready to abide any terms and conditions and hence the impugned order may be set aside and Criminal Revision may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for released of pistol and submitted that the petitioner has fired several times not given possession of the pistol. 6. From perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Court below, it appears that the prayer for release of the pistol was rejected on the ground that the investigation is pending against the petitioner. 7. During course of submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the photo copy of the certified copy of the order sheet of the learned Court below from 15.04.2024 till 05.07.2025 by which it reveals that the police has submitted final form in Jasidih P.S. Case No. 473 of 2022. However, notice has been issued to the informant for his appearance and till date final report has not been accepted. 8. It appears that the police has already submitted final report and the same is pending before the Trial Court below. 9. It has been held in the case of Sunderbhai Ambala Desai vrs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 at paragraphs Nos.10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 as follows:- “Para-10:- To avoid such a situation, in our view, powers under Section 451 CrPC should be exercised promptly and at the earliest. Valuable articles and currency notes Para-11:- With regard to valuable articles, such as, golden or silver ornaments or articles studded with precious stones, it is submitted that it is of no use to keep such articles in police custody for years till the trial is over. In our view, this 2025:JHHC:19520 3 submission requires to be accepted. In such cases, the Magistrate should pass appropriate orders as contemplated under Section 451 CrPC at the earliest. Para-12:- For this purpose, if material on record indicates that such articles belong to the complainant at whose house theft, robbery or dacoity has taken place, then seized articles be handed over to the complainant after: (1) preparing detailed proper panchnama of such articles; (2) taking photographs of such articles and a bond that such articles would be produced if required at the time of trial; and (3) after taking proper security. Para-13:- For this purpose, the court may follow the procedure of recording such evidence, as it thinks necessary, as provided under Section 451 CrPC. The bond and security should be taken so as to prevent the evidence being lost, altered or destroyed. The court should see that photographs of such articles are attested or countersigned by the complainant, accused as well as by the person to whom the custody is handed over. Still however, it would be the function of the court under Section 451 CrPC to impose any other appropriate condition. Para-14:- In case, where such articles are not handed over either to the complainant or to the person from whom such articles are seized or to its claimant, then the court may direct that such articles be kept in bank lockers. Similarly, if articles are required to be kept in police custody, it would be open to the SHO after preparing proper panchnama to keep such articles in a bank locker. In any case, such articles should be produced before the Magistrate within a week of their seizure. If required, the court may direct that such articles be handed back to the investigating officer for further investigation and identification. However, in no set of circumstances, the investigating officer should keep such articles in custody for a longer period for the purposes of investigation and identification. For currency notes, similar procedure can be followed. Vehicles Para-15:- Learned Senior Counsel Mr Dholakia, appearing for the State of Gujarat further submitted that at present in the police station premises, a number of vehicles are kept unattended and vehicles become junk day by day. It is his contention that appropriate directions should be given to the Magistrates who are dealing with such questions to hand over 2025:JHHC:19520 4 such vehicles to their owners or to the person from whom the said vehicles are seized by taking appropriate bond and guarantee for the return of the said vehicles if required by the court at any point of time. Para-16:- However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that this question of handing over the vehicle to the person from whom it is seized or to its true owner is always a matter of litigation and a lot of arguments are advanced by the persons concerned. Para-17:- In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles. 10. It appears that initially the Trial Court had rejected the petition of the petitioner on the ground that the investigation is pending against the petitioner in this case. However, it is evident that now the police has submitted final form in this case which is in favour of the petitioner and hence the stage of the case has been changed. 11. It appears that the petitioner has been granted license on 13.01.2021 (i.e. Annexure-4) on account of threat given to the petitioner. 12. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 01.05.2023 passed by the learned Court below in Misc. Criminal Application No.3474 of 2022 is, set aside and the matter is remitted before the Court below to pass fresh order, in accordance with law. 13. With the above observation, the Cr. Rev. No.1389 of 2023 stands disposed of. 2025:JHHC:19520 5 14. The petitioner is directed to file necessary petition before the learned Court below and the Court below will consider the same within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Saket/-