LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Cr.P.C. Sec.457

(Querist) 05 February 2009 This query is : Open 
In a criminal matter u/s 379,380 stolen ornaments were recovered from the accused on the basis of disclosor made by him in investigation. He further disclosed to the police that he has stolen the ornaments from the house of the complainant.
The complainant made an application u/s 457 in the Court for returning of the ornaments.
But he has no documents (purchase receipts) to establishe his ownership and the ornaments are old more than 30 years,
How can the complaint prove his ownership in this situation?
PALNITKAR V.V. (Expert) 05 February 2009
It is not necessary that in each and every case ownership must be proved through documents. Identification of the property by the persons who are familiar with the articles may be sufficient prima facie proof. There can be identification of articles like identification of accused. If the description of the property if given in the FIR that will fortify the claim.
M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Expert) 05 February 2009
I agree with what Mr. Palnitkar said, It is not necessary that ownership must be proved by documentary evidence. The property recovered with description and the description made in FIR must co-relate.
Jainodin shaikh (Querist) 05 February 2009
Could you please suggest any caselaw on this point?
Btw thanks for the answer!
PALNITKAR V.V. (Expert) 07 February 2009
Sorry my dear friend. I could not find any direct ruling on the point.
B.N.Rajamohamed (Expert) 08 February 2009
Sir,

During pendency of the case a petition U/S 451 Cr.P.C. alone is recommended for returning of the property and in case of conclusion of the trial a petiton U/S 452 Cr.P.C. is recommended. The petition filed by the complainant U/S 457 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked because, it is the powers of the magistrate to dispose of the property when reported by the police but not produced during the trial. So, he should not have filed the petition under the section as you have mentioned .

For the purpose of identification of the property I agree with te opinions rendered by my above named brothers

Prakash Yedhula (Expert) 10 June 2012
Very helpful reply


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :





Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query