Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sarna Devi vs State Of H.P on 29 November, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No. 201 of 2021
Reserved on:09.11.2023
.
Date of Decision: 29th November,2023
Sarna Devi
....Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P.
of
....Respondent
Coram
rt
Hon'ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? No.
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Sen, Deputy Advocate
General with ASI Nand Lal, P.S.
Bhunter, District Kullu, H.P.
Rakesh Kainthla,Judge.
The present revision petition is directed against the
order dated 13.07.2021, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Kullu, H.P. vide which the application filed by
the petitioner (applicant before the learned Trial Court) was
dismissed, (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same
___________________
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for
convenience).
.
2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present
revision are that the police received a letter on 02.12.2020 from
the informant Yograj that he met Krishna Pujari on the
Facebook. She sent a message to the informant and both of
of
them became good friends. He received a call and the caller
identified herself as Krishna Pujari. She offered to introduce
rt
the informant to her friend. Krishna Pujari called the informant
to meet her near Shani Mandir on 17.11.2020. She also told him
to bring one bottle of liquor and two bottles of bear. The
informant went to the Shani Mandir as advised. An Omni Van
bearing registration no. HP34C-9244 stopped near the
informant's vehicle. Two women got out of the van and
boarded the informant's vehicle. One woman introduced
herself as Krishna and her friend as Sarna. They asked the
informant to take them to his home but he declined.The
informant received a call on 17.11.2020 from Sarna, who asked
the informant to drop her at Rahala. Krishna made a call to the
informant on 18.11.2020 and asked him to drop Sarna at her
home. The informant went to Bajora where Sarna was present.
She boarded his vehicle. The informant purchased a beer bottle
.
on the asking of Sarna. She asked the informant to stop the
vehicle in the Jungle. He stopped the vehicle. A Scorpio stopped
near the informant's vehicle. Five persons got out of the vehicle
and gave beatings to the informant. They threatened to falsely
of
implicate him in a rape case. They demanded ₹10,00,000/-. The
informant called his friend and paid ₹1,23,000/-. The police
rt
registered the F.I.R. and conducted the investigation. The police
arrested the accused and seized their bank accounts. It was
found that all the accused had conspired together and
committed various offences. ₹70,000/- and Rs. 40,000/- were
deposited in the accounts of Krishna and Sarna on 23.11.2020.
₹ 10,00,000/- was deposited in one day. The police conducted
an investigation to find out the source of the money. ₹
39,11,441/- was deposited in the account of Krishna Pujari.
₹7,39,913/- was deposited in the account of Sarna. As per
revenue authorities, the income of the petitioner is ₹800/- per
month. The money is more than the income of the
petitioner.The Challan was prepared and presented before the
Court of Learned CJM, Lahul Spiti at Kullu.
.
3. The petitioner applied for the release of the amount
before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu. Learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu held that the petitioner had
failed to disclose the source of the income. Defreezing the
of
accounts would provide an opportunity for the applicant to
manipulate the amount, which would be prejudicial to the
rt
investigation and the money could not be released at this stage.
Hence, the application was dismissed.
4. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, the present revision
petition has been filed asserting that the account of the
accused/petitioner can not be kept frozen for a long time. The
police requested the Bank to seize the account of the petitioner
on 03.12.2020. The petitioner needs access to her bank account.
She requires the money to meet `the needs of her family. The
amount involved in the present case is around ₹ 40,000/- and
only that much amount can be frozen. No notice was issued to
the petitioner before freezing the bank account. The challan
was prepared and presented before the Court. No fruitful
.
purpose would be served by freezing the bank account of the
petitioner. Therefore, it was prayed that the present revision
petition be allowed and the order dated 13.07.2021 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, H.P. be set aside.
of
5. The revision petition is opposed by filing a reply
making preliminary
rt submission regarding the lack of
maintainability. It was asserted that the account of the
petitioner shows the transaction of ₹7,39,913/-. She has also
purchased a Hyundai Santro Car bearing no. HP34D-7062. She
has also maintained luxury items in her house. She has
acquired disproportionate assets by illegal means. The
application has been filed by SHO Bhunter District Kullu, H.P. to
the Enforcement Directorate, Shimla for initiating an inquiry
into the matter under the provisions of the Prevention of
Money Laundering Act, 2002. The petitioner has not shown any
source of income. Therefore, the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Kullu has rightly dismissed the application. Hence, it was
prayed that the present revision petition be dismissed.
6. I have heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Advocate, for
the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate
.
General, for the respondent-State
7. Mr Vijay Kumar Arora, Advocate, submitted that the
police do not have the power to seize the bank account
indefinitely. There is no connection between the crime and the
of
seizure of the bank account. The police had written a letter to
the Enforcement Directorate, Shimla to investigate the matter
rt
under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering
Act, 2002. This Court had already defreezed the bank account of
one of the accused. Therefore, he prayed that the present
petition be allowed and the order passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge,Kullu, H.P. be set aside.
8. Mr Parshant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate General
for the respondent State submitted that a lot of money is lying
in the account of the petitioner and the matter has been
referred to the Enforcement Directorate, Shimla to investigate
the matter under the provisions of the Prevention of Money
Laundering Act, 2002. Release of the money, at this stage, will
not be proper. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be
dismissed.
.
9. I have given considerable thought to the rival
submissions at the bar and have gone through the records
carefully.
10. As per the status report, the police have already
of
written letters dated 02.12.2021, 13.12.2021, 13.09.2023 and
29.10.2023 to the
rt Enforcement Directorate, Shimla to
investigate the matter under the provisions of the Prevention of
Money Laundering Act, 2002.However, no action has been
taken by the Enforcement Directorate, Shimla. The fact that the
Enforcement Directorate Shimla has not taken any action for
the last two years shows that no action has been proposed by
the Enforcement Directorate in the matter. The police are
apprehending the money laundering and have not specified
that the money deposited in the account is proceeds of crime.
Therefore, there is force in the submission of learned counsel
for the petitioner that money cannot be detained indefinitely.
11. A Coordinate Bench of this Court has already
ordered the release of the money to Krishna Devi,in Criminal
Revision No. 202 of 2021 dated 21.09.2021. There is no reason to
.
take a different view in the case of the petitioner.
12. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the
amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner on her
furnishing a security amount equal to the amount, which she
of
seeks to release from the Bank to the satisfaction of the learned
Trial Court. In case she wants to get the
rt money
released/withdrawn from the bank multiple times, every time
she will have to furnish the aforesaid bonds. After receipt of
the requisite bonds, the concerned Court will permit her to get
the money released from the bank. Copy of this order be sent to
the learned Trial Court for information.
13 The revision petition stands disposed of in the
aforesaid terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if
any.
(Rakesh Kainthla)
Judge
29th November,2023
(Ravinder)
