Gujarat High Court
Narayan Corporation Through ... vs State Of Gujarat on 24 February, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/SCR.A/5031/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5031 of 2020
============================================
NARAYAN CORPORATION THROUGH HIRENBHAI KANTIBHAI
KARKAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
============================================
Appearance:
MR APURVA R KAPADIA(5012) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MS MD MEHTA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 24/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Shri Apurva R. Kapadia for the petitioners
and learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta for the respondent - State.
2. By way of this application, the applicants pray for quashing of the
order dated 31.08.2020 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge,
Surat, in Criminal Revision Application No.165 of 2020 confirming the
order dated 10.08.2020 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Surat, whereby application of the petitioners for
defreezing the account No.183705000388 with ICICI Bank Ltd., L.P. Savani
Road Branch, Surat, is rejected.
3. Learned Advocate Shri Kapadia points out that freezing of the
account is under exercise of power as derived under Section 102 of Code of
Criminal Procedure and whereas according to the learned Advocate, seizure
as described under the provision which can be co-related to the freezing of
R/SCR.A/5031/2020 ORDER
the account of the present applicants may also subject to two conditions i.e.
Police Officer acting under Sub-section(1) shall forthwith report the seizure
to the Magistrate having jurisdiction and further the person in whose
custody the ownership the property was or belonging shall be informed
immediately about the said seizure. Learned Advocate also draws attention
of this Court to the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Muktaben
M. Mashru Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. passed in CRL. M.C. No.4206
of 2018 and Crl. M.A. No.30311 of 2018, wherein the High Court was
concerned with the case of similar facts and whereas the learned Advocate
has relied upon the conclusion arrived at in the said judgment.
4. Learned Advocate Shri Kapadia also draws attention of this Court to
the order dated 26.06.2020 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court
(Coram: Bhargav D. Karia, J.) in Criminal Misc. Application No.8745 of
2020, where the complaint in connection with which order of de-freezing
had been passed, has been challenged before this Court and this Court had
issued Rule making it returnable on 29.06.2020 and whereas according to
the learned Advocate, the said mater is still pending.
5. In the instant case, learned APP submits a report by the Investigating
Officer, which inter alia shows that after defreezing of the Account, the
Magistrate having jurisdiction, had not been informed about the same. As a
matter of fact, defreezing had been ordered by the concerned Investigating
Officer vide order dated 12.06.2020 and whereas it appears that the
Magistrate has not been informed as yet.
6. In view of the above, issue Rule returnable on 05.04.2021. Learned
APP waives service of Rule on behalf respondent State.
7. By way of interim order, the bank account of the applicants being
No. 183705000388 with ICICI Bank Ltd., L.P. Savani Road Branch, Surat,
R/SCR.A/5031/2020 ORDER
shall be de-freezed subject to the applicants executing separate bond before
the trial Court undertaking to produce the amount available in the account
at the time of defreezing as and when required by the Court and also to the
extent that if any such order made by Court regarding disposal of the said
amount, the same shall be complied with by the applicants jointly and
severally.
Direct service through electronic mode is permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Y.N. VYAS
