accused in G.R. Case No.580 of 2022, opened fire from his licensed revover which along with other articles has been seized in connection with the said case. If the expert opinion would make it clear that fire was opened from the seized revolver, then the complicity of the petitioner in opening fire from the revolver would against him for misuse of the licensed revolver. As expert opinion in the matter is quite necessary, in absence of receipt of the expert opinion on the seized revolver, live cartridges, empty fired cartridge (Khoka) etc, it would not be proper to direct release of the seized revolver in favour of the petitioner. Further, it is found that the seized revolver is not presently available in Police Malkhana or Court Malkhana. The same has been sent to R.F.S.L., Sambalpur for ballistic/chemical examination and report. The said revolver has not been received back till yet. So it is quite clear that, the seized revolver is not in the custody of the police at present and the order of its release is not wise under the circumstances. Thus, it is held that, the criminal revision having filed at a premature stage cannot be allowed and therefore, the impugned order dtd.12.04.2023 passed by the J.M.F.C.-II(CT), Sambalpur in Crl. Misc. Application No.44 of 2023 is found just and proper with further observation that the petitioner is at liberty to renew his petition afresh for release of the seized revolver in favour of the petitioner, after receipt of the seized revolver a well as the expert opinion from the R.F.S.L., Sambalpur, if the petitioner’s revolver license shall have not been revoked by then.”
