Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a criminal miscellaneous petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The petitioner, a complainant in a theft case, sought release of gold-silver ornaments and a registration certificate on supurdagi after police recovered them during investigation. The trial court had partly allowed the application by releasing the registration certificate but refused to hand over the ornaments, and the revisional court affirmed that refusal. The petitioner contended that she was the rightful owner, that the ornaments were ancestral and hence no purchase bills were available, that photographs of the jewellery supported her claim, and that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the ornaments in police custody. She relied on the Supreme Court decision in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638, which permits release of seized articles on appropriate terms to prevent decay. The prosecution opposed the petition but did not place any material contradicting the petitioner's ownership claim. The High Court noted that the FIR was lodged by the petitioner herself, that the FIR contained a clear description of the stolen articles, that the recovered articles were identified by the petitioner during investigation, and that the prosecution's own case was that the recovered articles were stolen from the petitioner's house and recovered from the accused. No other person claimed ownership of the recovered articles. In these circumstances, the court held that it was unreasonable for the trial and revisional courts to deny delivery solely on the ground that the petitioner did not produce proof of ownership or bills. The court observed that the absence of invoices, especially when no one else claims the articles, cannot be a basis for refusing to hand over the articles to the petitioner. Guided by Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the court allowed the petition, set aside the orders of the revisional court dated 13.08.2025 and the trial court dated 10.03.2025 to the extent they refused release of the ornaments, and directed the trial court to release the gold and silver ornaments on supurdagi to the petitioner subject to conditions: furnishing an undertaking or affidavit regarding identity and production of the ornaments, and undertaking not to sell the ornaments or make any changes that would render them unidentifiable. The stay application and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Release of Seized Property (Supurdagi) - Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Seized gold-silver ornaments recovered during investigation of theft complaint filed by petitioner; trial and revisional courts refused release solely because petitioner did not produce purchase bills - Held: when no other person claims ownership and petitioner identified articles as stolen from her house, absence of invoices cannot justify refusal; relying on Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638 that seized articles may be released on terms to prevent decay, High Court set aside lower orders and directed release on conditions of undertaking and non-alienation (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court and revisional court were justified in refusing to release seized gold-silver ornaments on supurdagi to the petitioner/complainant solely on the ground of absence of purchase bills or proof of ownership.
Final Decision
Petition allowed; orders of revisional court dated 13.08.2025 and trial court dated 10.03.2025 to the extent refusing release of gold/silver ornaments on supurdagi set aside; trial court directed to release ornaments on supurdagi subject to conditions: (i) furnish undertaking/affidavit regarding identity and production of ornaments; (ii) undertake not to sell ornaments or make changes rendering them unidentifiable; stay application and pending applications disposed of.
Law Points
- Seized articles may be released on supurdagi to prevent decay while in custody
- Absence of purchase bills not fatal when no other claimant and articles identified by complainant
- Conditions of undertaking and non-alienation can be imposed
- Orders refusing supurdagi solely for lack of bills are unsustainable
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- 2023 Section 528
