This court modified the Sessions Court order by directing that the seized cash amount be paid to the respondent-son only upon filing a writing undertaking to produce an equivalent sum if the pending appeal against the acquittal succeeds.
Amount paid only on undertaking to produce equivalent sum if pending appeal succeeds.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WP1237.12.doc
1
SQP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1237 OF 2012
Kanaiyalal Jasraj Parmar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Anand Kandoi i/b Mr. A.M.Saraogi for Petitioner
Mrs. R.V.Newton, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State
Mr. Jehangir Khajotia for Respondent Nos.2 and 3
CORAM:- ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE :- JUNE 13, 2013
P.C.
1999, renumbered as CC No.3487PW of 2005 which was filed before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Andheri. In the course of investigation of the said case, an amount of Rs.One Lakh came to be seized by the
concerned police station. The manner in which it was seized and the circumstances under which it came to be seized are in dispute. The
1/4
SQ Pathan
WP1237.12.doc
2
respondent No.3 herein was the sole accused in that case. The learned Magistrate after holding the trial, acquitted the respondent No.3. He also passed an order regarding the seized cash amount of Rs.One Lakh along with accrued interest, by directing it to be forfeited and credited to the Government after the expiry of appeal period.
2/4
SQ Pathan
WP1237.12.doc
3
3/4
SQ Pathan
WP1237.12.doc
4
warranted. The same stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.
4/4
SQ Pathan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order directing payment of seized cash to the respondent-son should be modified pending the outcome of the appeal challenging the acquittal.
Whether a condition to produce an equivalent sum of money should be imposed on the beneficiary pending the appeal outcome.
Kanaiyalal Jasraj Parmar
The State of Maharashtra
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.3
ABHAY M. THIPSAY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
