AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ajay Tewari, J. (Oral)—CRM No.21387 of 2016
This is an application for preponing the hearing of the main case fixed for 03.11.2016.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The hearing of the main case is preponed and is taken up for hearing today itself.
C.R.M-M No.2750 of 2016
This petition has been filed against the order dated 13.06.2014 whereby the house of the petitioner was seized pursuant to an application moved by the Investigating Officer under Section 105-E of Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balram Mihani and others, 2010(2) SCC 602, wherein the Supreme Court held that Chapter VII-A of Cr.P.C., under which the seizure provision falls, would not apply to local offences defined under the Indian Penal Code.
Learned Additional Advocate General has very fairly conceded to the aforesaid position of law.
In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.
Since the main case has been decided, the pending Criminal Misc. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.