Jia Uddin v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 20.06.2024 Heard Mr. J. Laskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional P.P. for the State of Assam.

¶2This is a petition u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying for quashing the judgment dated

29.05.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Criminal Revision No. 02/2024.

¶3250 bags of betel nuts weighing 12500 kilograms were seized by police in connection with Bazaricherra P.S. Case No. 43/2023.

¶4The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the goods filed an application before the Page No.# 2/2 learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj seeking the custody of the seized goods. On 16.03.2023, the learned Magistrate rejected the prayer seeking custody of the betel nuts.

¶5Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court vide Criminal Revision Petition No. 261/2023. In this Court, the petitioner had withdrawn the application, but liberty was granted to him by this Court to approach the Trial Court seeking custody of the betel nuts, if the betel nuts were not disposed of.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner approached the Trial Court again on 02.11.2023. The Trial Court referred to the order passed by this Court and gave custody of the seized betel nuts to the petitioner.

¶7Thereafter, the State of Assam filed a Revision Petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj praying for setting aside the aforesaid order passed by the Magistrate.

¶8On 29.05.2024, the learned Sessions Judge allowed the Revision Petition and set aside the order of the Magistrate.

¶9The only ground shown by the learned Sessions Judge is that the Magistrate cannot review its own order because on earlier occasion, he had rejected the prayer and on subsequent order, he had allowed the prayer.

¶10I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. I find that the learned Sessions Judge did not refer to the order passed by this Court.

¶11Therefore, the impugned order dated 29.05.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Criminal Revision No. 02/2024 is bad in law and stands set aside.

¶12The order dated 02.11.2023 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj giving custody of the seized goods to the petitioner is restored. The criminal petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010115732024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./672/2024 JIA UDDIN S/O LATE BADRUL HOQUE, R/O BAGHAN, P.S.-BAZARICHERRA, DIST- KARIMGNAJ, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA