Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Meghalaya/
  4. 2024/
  5. November

Bijay Singh vs. State of Meghalaya and Anr.

Decided on 28 November 2024• Citation: Crl.Rev.P./17/2023• High Court of Meghalaya
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                                           2024:MLHC:1091         
               Serial No.05                                                       
               RegularList                                                        
                                  HIGH COURT   OF MEGHALAYA                       
                                       AT SHILLONG                                
               Crl. Rev. P. No. 17 of 2023             Date of Order: 28.11.2024  
               _______________________________________________________________    
               Shri. Bijay Singh        Vs.  1.State of Meghalaya, Represented by its
               S/O Shri Rajendra Prasad Singh Commissioner and Secretary, Home,   
               R/O Plot No. 237, R.R. Colony, Shillong.                           
               Rynjah, Shillong, East Khasi Hills                                 
               District, Meghalaya.          2.Shri. Sanjay Sharma,               
                                             S/o Shri. Kailash Chandra Sharma,    
                                             Of 13 CB, Luckier Road, Garikhana,   
                                             Shillong.                            
               ….PETITIONER.                 ….RESPONDENTS.                       
               Coram:                                                             
                    Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge                   
               Appearance:                                                        
               For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. A. S. Siddiqui, Sr. Adv. with
                                         Ms. A. Kharmyndai, Adv.                  
               For the Respondent(s)    : Ms. S. Shyam, GA. (R: - 1)              
                                         Mr. N. Khera, Adv. (R: - 2 )             
               ORAL:-                                                             
                    Heard Mr. A. S. Siddiqui, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. A.
               Kharmyndai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner also Ms. S. Shyam,
               learned GA appearing for the State-respondent No.1 and Mr. N. Khera, learned
               Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.                         
                    By this criminal revision petition, the petitioner has challenged the
               impugned order dated 22-09-2023 passed in Other Application No.21 of 2023
                                                                   Page 1 of 4    

                                                           2024:MLHC:1091         
               by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shillong whereby one Weighing
               Machine (Electronic Weighing Scale) and 21 (twenty one) number of keys
               seized by Seizure List dated 29-11-2022 in connection with the Lumdiengjri
               P.S Case No. 123 (10) 2022 under Section 380 IPC were released on Zimma to
               the respondent No.2.                                               
                    Assailing the impugned order, Mr. A. S. Siddiqui, learned Senior
               Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to a report dated
               20-09-2023 forwarded by the Investigating Officer of the Lumdiengjri P.S Case
               No. 123 (10) 2022 requesting the Court not to release any of the materials
               seized by the seizure memo dated 29-11-2022 and submitted that the learned
               Chief Judicial Magistrate while passing the impugned order has not taken into
               consideration the aforesaid report and directed the release of the seized
               materials to the respondent No.2 mechanically without any application of
               mind. It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the learned Chief
               Judicial Magistrate could not have passed the impugned order directing for
               release of seized materials in favour of the respondent No.2 as the release on
               Zimma has to be made on the basis of the materials on record. He, thus, prays
               that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded back for
               passing of order afresh.                                           
                    Ms. S. Shyam, learned GA for the State-respondent No.1 supports the
               impugned order and submits that no illegality has been committed by the
               learned Chief Judicial Magistrate while passing the impugned order and the
               same calls for no interference by this Court.                      
                    Mr. N. Khera, learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 refuted the
               submission made on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the seizure was
               made consequent to the registration of the Lumdiengjri P.S Case No. 123 (10)
               2022 on the basis of the FIR lodged by the respondent No.2 wherein petitioner
               is the main accused. He submitted that the respondent No.2 is the rightful
                                                                   Page 2 of 4    

                                                           2024:MLHC:1091         
               person to whom the materials were released on Zimma as the petitioner being
               the accused cannot seek release of the seized materials in his favour. The
               learned Counsel further submitted that a civil suit being Title Suit No. 23 (H) of
               2022 is pending in the Court of Assistant District Judge, Shillong, between the
               respondent No.2 and the petitioner covering the issue of claim and ownership
               of the materials seized by the police. The learned Counsel further invited
               attention of this Court to orders dated 28-11-2022 and 03-07-2023 passed in
               Misc. C/No. 45 (H) 2022 arising out of the above Title Suit whereby the civil
               Court has granted injunction in favour of the respondent No.2. It is submitted
               that the petitioner is actively contesting the said civil proceeding and has
               already filed an appeal against the orders dated 28-11-2022 and 03-07-2023,
               however, has not been able to obtain any order in his favour. The learned
               Counsel submitted that since the matter stands seized by the Civil Court and
               there exists orders in favour of the respondent No.2, the impugned order of
               Zimma passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot be faulted with.
               The learned Counsel contended that there is no merit in this revision petition
               and the same deserves to be dismissed forthwith.                   
                    Upon hearing the submission of the rival parties and on perusal of
               materials on record, it is clear that there is a civil suit pending between the rival
               parties covering the materials which were seized in connection with the
               Lumdiengjri P.S Case No. 123 (10) 2022 under Section 380 IPC. There also
                    interim orders                                                
               exists          dated 28-11-2022 and 03-07-2023 passed in favour of the
               respondent No.2. Furthermore, in the order dated 28-11-2022, a direction has
               been made to the police authority to ensure compliance of the interim order.
               Since the entire matter sands seized by the civil Court over the claim and
               ownership of the seized materials between the rival parties and there are
               existing orders in favour of the respondent No.2, no illegality can be attributed
               to the impugned order 22-09-2023 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
                                                                   Page 3 of 4    

                                                           2024:MLHC:1091         
               That the report dated 20-09-2023 of the Investigating Officer is also
               inconsequential at this stage in view of the orders passed by a competent civil
               Court.                                                             
                    For what has been discussed above, there is no merit in this revision
               petition and the same stands dismissed.                            
                                                               Judge              
               Meghalaya                                                          
               28.11.2024                                                         
               “                                                                  
                Biswarup PS”                                                      
                                                                   Page 4 of 4    
     Signature Not Verified                                                       
     Digitally signed by BISWARUP                                                 
     BHATTACHARJEE                                                                
     Date: 2024.11.28 17:37:50 IST