Allowed

Suresh Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021A482/14901/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that property nexus with offence does not preclude release under Section 451 CrPC. Application allowed; impugned order quashed directing release of seized currency notes upon furnishing bond with sureties and adequate conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; direction to release seized currency notes in applicant's possession upon furnishing bond with two solvent sureties and adequate conditions.

Suresh Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14901 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tulsi Singh Yadav,Abhishek Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant to quash the impugned order dated 27.07.2020 passed by Special Judge NDPS Act/Additional Session Judge Court No.5, Saharanpur in Criminal Misc. Case No. Nil of 2020, C.N.R. No. UPSP-004797-2020, Suresh Gupta Versus State of U.P. and to direct the respondent no. 1 & 2 to release as amount 5,49,880/- in favour of the applicant.

¶7

In brief fact of the case is that the F.I.R as case Crime No. 102/2020 has been lodged by the informant, the Police SubInspector on 12.04.2020 against the applicant and co-accused alleging therein that on the information of Mukhbir, a raid was made on 12.04.2020 at about 01:00 hours at Tilak Ram Dairy Mohalla Radha Vihar, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar and narcotic drugs were recovered from the possession of the applicant and applicant handed over a grey colour bag to the police from that place from which currency notes totalling amount Rs. 5,49,880/- were recovered. It is alleged that recovered currency notes were proceeds of the narcotics drug sold by the accused persons.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is the owner of the currency notes seized by the police. Applicant is proprietor of the M/s Tilak Medicine Agencies and possessed a valid licence to sale, stocks or distribute for wholesale of drugs which is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. There is nothing to show that amount recovered from him were earned from any illegal activity. He further submits that applicant has been granted bail in this offence and has no previous criminal history. He is a businessman and due to seizure of his currency notes he is suffering irreparable loss.

¶9

Learned Counsel for the applicant has relied on observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer made by counsel for the applicant and has contended that recovered currency notes are connected with the offence and there is no illegality in the impugned order.

¶11

The general law relating to release of valuable articles/currency notes/vehicles/seized liquors and narcotic drugs etc. in connection with crime pending, investigation or trial has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat (Supra) .

¶12

In the said decision with regard to the release of valuable articles and currency notes following observations have been made:-

¶13

"Valuable articles such as golden or silver ornaments or articles studded with precious stones, need not be kept in police custody for years till trial is over. The Magistrate should pass appropriate orders as contemplated under Section 451 Cr.PC at the earliest. For this purpose, if material on record indicates that such articles belong to the complainant at whose house theft, robbery or dacoity has taken place, then seized articles be handed over to the complainant after:

¶14

(1) preparing details proper panchnama of such articles:

¶15

(2) taking photographs of such articles and a bond that such articles would be produced if required at the time of trial; and

¶16

(3) after taking proper security.

¶17

For this purpose, the court may follow the procedure of recording such evidence, as it thinks necessary, as provided under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The bond and security should be taken so as to prevent the evidence b being lost, altered or destroyed. The court should see that photographs of such articles are attested or countersigned by the complainant, accused as well as by the person to whom the custody is handed over. Still however, it would be the function of the court under Section 451 CrPC to impose any other appropriate condition.

¶18

In case, where such articles are not handed over either to the complainant or to the person from whom such articles are seized or to its claimant, then the court may direct that such articles be kept in bank lockers. Similarly, if articles are required to be kept in police custody, it would be open to the SHO after preparing proper panchnama to keep such articles in a bank locker. In any case, such articles should be produced before the Magistrate within a week of their seizure. If required, the court may direct that such articles be handed back to the investigating officer for further investigation and identification. However, in no set of circumstances the investigating officer should keep and articles in custody for a longer period for the purposes of investigation and identification. For currency notes, similar procedure can be followed."

¶19

The purport of the case law cited by the learned counsel for the applicant is that power under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be

¶20

exercised expeditiously. The reason being that owner of the article should not suffer because of it remaining unused and the police should not be required to keep the article in safe custody. It is further laid down in the aforesaid case law that while giving custody of the article, article should not be released on proper security.

¶21

In the instant case there is no dispute regarding the ownership of the currency notes. Application of the applicant has been rejected on the ground that the recovered currency notes are connected with the offence and is case property.

¶22

After hearing both the parties as well as perusing the material on record and the precedent law cited by the counsel for the applicant, this Court is of the opinion that as per the legislative intent of Section 451 Cr.P.C., the property means any property regarding which an offence appears to have been committed or which appears to have been used for the commission of any offence and therefore, the release of vehicle/article/currency notes under Section 451 Cr.P.C. cannot be restricted merely on account of the fact that they were used for commission of any offence.

¶23

In the light of the aforesaid discussions and the aforesaid precedent law, the present applicant is allowed . The impugned order dated 27.07.2020 passed by the Court concerned is hereby quashed and set aside and Court concerned is directed to release the currency notes in supurdigi of the applicant upon his furnishing the bond with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned and on adequate conditions.

¶24

Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Sachin

Suresh Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gajendra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hasna and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satrudhan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jakir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikash Tiwari @ Satya Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another