The facts in brief leading to the filing of this petition are that a case under section 379/411, P.P.C.
Read with section 14/VI/79 Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance was registered. From petitioner's possession certain trees were recovered which were taken into possession by the police -under section 550, Cr.P.C. On 8-5-1990. Later on; the said wood was identified by Mubarik Ali, Block Officer, Forest Department, to be the property, of the Forest Department.
2. The petitioner applied for Spurdari of the trees, which was accordingly given to him. The Forest Department filed a revision. The learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the orders and directed that the wood in question be given on Spurdari to the Forest Department. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had purchased wood from the Government High School, Wan Radha Ram, for which a receipt was also executed. Contends that even otherwise the trees alleged to have been stolen as mentioned in the F.I.R., their diaphragm was different from the trees recovered at the instance of the petitioner.
3. I have heard the learned counsel and gone through the file. Challan has already been submitted in Court. According to the orders of the learned Magistrate, diaphragm of the trees recovered at the instance of the petitioner did not tally with the diaphragm of the trees, which were the subject- matter of the alleged theft. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has not given any finding about the; receipt in possession of the petitioner. The Investigating Officer also did not bother to find out from the Head Master of the concerned school with regard to the authenticity of the receipt. In these circumstances, I accept the petition, set aside the orders impugned. The petitioner shall retain the case property on Spurdari on the conditions already laid down in the Spurdari order.