The Bombay High Court in Vikram and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra reiterated that no immovable property is amenable to seizure under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and what is to be seized thereunder is only movable property.
High Court Bench while making this observation placed reliance on Nevada Properties Private Limited Through its Directors Vs. State of Maharashtra and another (2019) 20 SCC 119.
Facts
The immovable property of the petitioner was attached by the Investigating officer in the instant case with regards to offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. Along with this injunction was also issued that henceforth the petitioner shall not enter into any sale transaction of the seized immovable property.
Court’s Interference
The Court while placing reliance on Nevada Properties Private Limited Through its Directors Vs. The state of Maharashtra and another (2019) 20 SCC 119, stated that such an act of attaching the immovable property was wrong in law and not in accordance with the principles settled in the aforementioned judgement. The Court further observed that in the name of taking action against criminals, outlaws and offenders in serious crimes, no Investigating Officer can flout the procedural requirements, can breach the limits of the law, can openly disrespect the law declared by the highest Court of the land and thus, proclaim himself to be the law unto himself.
The Court thus directed the Respondent to remove/detach the attachment/seizure from the house property of the petitioners.
Case Title: Vikram and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra
Coram: SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND M.W.CHANDWANI, JJ.
Case No.: CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.636/2020
Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. S.K.Mishra, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Adarsh Dubey
Advocate for Respondent: Mr. S.S.Doifode, APP
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
