Bombay High Court
Shahaji Yashwant Salgar vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 December, 2022
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
:1: 9.apeal-727-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 727 OF 2022
Shahaji Yashwant Salgar .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
______
Mr. Vikrant V. Phatate, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent-State.
______
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 02nd DECEMBER, 2022
P.C. :
1. The appellant has challenged the order dated
20.06.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in
Criminal Misc. Application No.82/2018.
2. Heard Shri Vikrant Phatate, learned counsel for the
appellant and Shri S. R. Agarkar, learned APP for the State.
3. The contention of the appellant in this appeal is that
the said order was passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Solapur in his capacity as the Judge in-charge of the matters
under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in
1 of 5
Deshmane(PS)
:2: 9.apeal-727-22.odt
Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (for short, 'MPID Act'). The
case of appellant is that he is the registered owner of the
property situated at 3rd floor, Shriyash Heights, at Survey
No.721A, having built sup area 823 sq. ft. at South Kasba,
Solapur. He had entered into the leave and license agreement
with M/s. Thiripura Chits Private limited represented by one
Sunil Revanshidha Hiraje. The leave and license agreement was
executed on 5.10.2016 for a period of thirty six months.
4. After that C.R.No.133/2018 was registered against
Sunil Hiraje and others under Sections 406, 420 read with 34 of
the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 & 4 of the MPID
Act. Pursuant to the registration of the F.I.R., the investigation
started and the investigating agency attached that property.
The appellant preferred the aforementioned Criminal Misc.
Application No.82/2018 before the trial Court challenging
attachment of said property.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
attachment of the property is completely illegal. The
investigating agency has no authority to attach any immovable
2 of 5
:3: 9.apeal-727-22.odt
property under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973. He relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Nevada Properties Private Limited, through its
Directors Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 1 as well as the
judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sudhir
Vasant Karnataki Vs. State of Maharashtra and others2. He
submitted that even the provisions of the MPID Act from
Section 4 onwards for attachment of property were not
followed and, therefore, sealing and attachment of the aforesaid
property is completely illegal.
6. Learned APP filed an affidavit of the Police Inspector
Shri Chandrakant Wable as per directions of this Court. This
Court had directed the investigating agency to justify their
action by relying on provisions of law.
7. I have perused the affidavit-in-reply. In the entire
reply no provisions of law was mentioned which enabled the
investigating agency to attach immovable property. There is no
1 (2019) 20 SCC 119
2 2011 ALL MR (Cri) 96 [FULL BENCH]
3 of 5
:4: 9.apeal-727-22.odt
reference to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and this Court in the aforementioned decisions. The only
contention raised is that the appellant is not entitled to get
possession of the property under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C.
8. Learned APP also could not point out any provision
under any law enabling the investigating agency to attach the
appellant's property in the present circumstances.
9. Considering this position, it is clear that the
investigating agency was not empowered to attach the
immovable property under the provisions of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. There is nothing to show that the
provisions under the MPID Act, particularly those under
Sections 4, 7, 8, 9 or 10 were followed in any manner.
10. In this view of matter, the action of the part of the
investigating agency to attach the appellant's property, which is
the subject matter of this appeal, is completely unjustified and
unsupported by any provision of law. It is an admitted position
that the appellant is not involved in the offence. Therefore, the
4 of 5
:5: 9.apeal-727-22.odt
appeal deserves to be allowed to that extent. Hence, the
following order :
:: O R D E R ::
i. The attachment of the appellant's property which is
described as situated at 3rd floor, Shriyash Heights, at
Survey No.721A, having built sup area 823 sq. ft. at
South Kasba, Solapur, is declared as illegal.
ii. The investigating agency shall immediately remove
attachment on that property. It is made clear that the
appellant as well as the investigating agency are free
to take further steps in accordance with law.
iii. Criminal Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Digitally signed
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
by
PRADIPKUMAR
PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO
PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE
DESHMANE
Date:
2022.12.06
17:51:50 +0530
Deshmane (PS)
5 of 5
