Naresh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

T.P. Garg, J.—This revision is directed against the order dated 9.1.1997 passed by the Special Judge (D.A.A.), Etah in S. S. T. No. 112 of 1996, State v. Prempal and Anr., whereby the application of Naresh Kumar, applicant, for the release of D.B.B.L. gun was rejected.

Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.G.A. for the State. Both agreed that the case be remanded back to the court below for passing a speaking order.

It has been alleged by the applicant that the D.B.B.L. gun of which he is the owner was not used in the alleged crime in any manner, and so the order passed by the learned Special Judge is bad in law. On the application of Naresh Kumar, applicant, the learned Special Judge has passed the following order:

Case property. Rejected.

From the above order, it is not made out as to what were the facts of the case and how and in what manner the D.B.B.L. gun of which the applicant claims to be the owner was used in commission of crime and would be required during the trial of the case. Admittedly, the learned Special Judge has not given any reason in support of his rejecting the prayer of the applicant.

Under the circumstances, the revision is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded back to the learned Special Judge (D.A.A.), Etah with the direction to hear the barters afresh and pass a fresh speaking order giving reasons in support of his view on the application of the applicant within four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.

Let a copy of this order be given to the learned Counsel for the parties, within 24 hours, on payment of usual charges.