Magistrates should necessarily put on notice those accused of having robbed valuables and provide them sufficient opportunity to explain their stand before passing orders on return of the recovered valuables to people, the Madras High Court Bench here has said.
Justice S. Nagamuthu made the observation while setting aside an order passed by a Judicial Magistrate at Vadipatti near here on June 3 refusing to hand over Rs.1.5 lakh and three gold coins to K. Periyasamy of Alanganallur since the police were yet to recover the rest of Rs.33,000 allegedly robbed from the petitioner’s house on March 24.
Hampering trial
The Magistrate had also said that returning the cash and other valuables might hamper the trial in the case. However, assailing the decision, the revision petitioner contended that no purpose would be served in not returning his properties since the police had already completed the investigation in the case and filed a final report before the Magistrate.
Unsustainable
Concurring with the petitioner, Mr. Justice Nagamuthu said: “In my considered opinion, the reasons cited by the Magistrate are wholly unsustainable. Simply because the respondent police are not in a position to recover the balance of cash and other articles, the petitioner cannot be denied the right to possess these properties pending trial.”
Remanding the matter to the Magistrate for considering it afresh, the judge said: “At the same time, no order for return of property could be made without hearing the accused in the case. Therefore… the matter is remanded back to the Judicial Magistrate with a direction to hold fresh enquiry after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, accused and the police.”
Judicial Magistrate at Vadipatti has been asked to review order in a theft case
