Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Order - 1
Pdf Text: ORDER 1 C.C.No. 1616/MISC/2025
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (FIRST CLASS),
SPECIAL COURT FOR ITPA, 54TH COURT, MAZGAON, MUMBAI.
C.C.NO. 1616/MISC/2025
(CNR No. MHMM120074722025)
Mariya Bhausaheb Garud ...Applicant/Accused
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Bhandup Police Station,
CR. NO. 65/2025) …Respondent.
ORDER BELOW EXH.-1
By way of present application, applicant/accused Mariya
Bhausaheb Garud claimed return of property i.e. mobile Phone of Oppo
A3 Pro 5G and purse containing Rs. 1000/-, make up material and
clothes.
2] I.O. and Ld. APP filed their reply. They resisted the said
application and submitted that the said mobile was used by the accused
during commission of offence and if it is returned to accused/applicant
then it can be again used in the same type of crime. Ld. APP submitted
that the IMEI number of said mobile is different than the mobile seized
by the police.
3] Perused the application and say. They both objected
strongly for returning the property. FIR in the present crime has been
registered under section 143(3) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Sections 4, 5 of ITP
Act, 1956. Section 143(3) of BNS is triable by the Hon'ble Sessions
Court. As per the say of Investigating Officer, the said mobile and other
property was seized from the possession of accused/applicant Mariya
-- 1 of 2 --
ORDER 2 C.C.No. 1616/MISC/2025
Garud. There are Whats app chats and mobile numbers of customers/
persons who are involved in the business of prostitution in this mobile.
So, there is possibility of again using the mobile in similar offences, if
returned.
4] After hearing both, going through the say and material
produced before me, I am of the view that the said mobile if returned
can be used for the similar purpose and crime as this current one. Also
there are chances of tampering of evidence if any, in the mobile, if
returned. The case is triable exclusively by Court of Sessions, hence
taking into consideration the seriousness of crime and importance of the
property which is seized, I am inclined to hold that it will not proper to
return the property to the applicant. Hence, considering this aspect I
proceed to pass the following order.
O R D E R
1 . Application is hereby rejected.
2. Applicant and her counsel to take note.
(N. B. Ghatage)
Judicial Magistrate (First Class),
Special Court for ITPA,
Date : 16.01.2026 54th Court at Mazgaon, Mumbai.
SVP
-- 2 of 2 --