Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.32 seconds)Section 106 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 457 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 458 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of Maharashtra vs Tapas D. Neogy on 16 September, 1999
9. The Honourable Supreme Court in State
of Maharashtra v. Tapas D Neogy [(1999) 7 SCC 685]
WP(C) NO. 38064 OF 2024 6
2024:KER:91154
has held that the bank account of the accused or any of
his relatives can be treated as "property" for the purpose
of Section 102 of the Code.
Teesta Atul Setalvad vs The State Of Gujarat on 15 December, 2017
10. Later, in Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State
of Gujarat [(2018) (2) SCC 372], the Supreme Court also
held that the Investigating Officer can issue instruction to
seize the suspected bank accounts, subject to his
submitting a report to the Magistrate concerned, as
mandated in sub-section (3) of Section 102.
Article 300A in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Madhu.K vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 26 August, 2020
13. In my considered view, this question has to
be addressed in the light of Article 300A of the
Constitution of India, which stipulates that no person shall
be deprived of his property except by authority of law.
The authority of law in the cases under consideration is
conferred by Section 102 Cr.P.C. Therefore, abject
violation of the procedure prescribed therein will
definitely affect the validity of the seizure. While on the
subject, it will be profitable to refer the well considered
judgment rendered by a learned single Judge of this Court
in Madhu K v. Sub Inspector of Police and others
[2020 (5) KLT 483], wherein the practice of certain police
officers of directing freezing of accounts without
reporting to the Magistrate concerned was deprecated.
This Court has directed in the judgment that the police
WP(C) NO. 38064 OF 2024 9
2024:KER:91154
officer acting under Section 102 Cr.P.C cannot be
permitted to arrogate to himself an unregulated and
unbridled power to freeze the bank account of a person on
mere surmise and conjuncture, since such unguarded
power may bring about drastic consequences affecting the
right to privacy as well as reputation of the account
holder. The other relevant portion of that judgment reads
as under:-
Shento Varghese vs Julfikar Husen on 28 August, 2023
11. Subsequently, another issue arose with
respect to cases in which there was a delay in reporting
the seizure to the Magistrate. This led to divergent views
being expressed by different High Courts. The issue was
set at rest by the Honourable Supreme Court in Shento
Varghese v. Julfikar Husen and others [2024 SCC
OnLine SC 895] in the following lines:
Dr Sajeer vs Reserve Bank Of India on 2 May, 2023
In the above conspectus, this writ petition is
disposed off by passing the following directions, in
addition to the directions in Dr.Sajeer (supra):
1