Allowed

Rajeev Kumar S/O N. K. Prasad v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC24 Jan 2023IA/1001/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed the Respondent to return seized demonetized currency notes to the Applicant in valid legal tender by following Rules framed under Section 11 of the Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Act, 2017.

What did the court decide?

Direction to return the amount of Rs. 1,45,500/- to the Applicant in valid currency notes following the prescribed Rules.

Rajeev Kumar S/O N. K. Prasad Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶2

1 / 7

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1001 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1157 OF 2019
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1376 OF 2012

¶5

Rajeev Kumar S/o N. K. Prasad.... Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra & Anr..... Respondents

¶8

Mr. Rajeev N. Kumar (Applicant-in-person).

¶9

Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.

¶10

Ms. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan, Advocate for Respondent No.2/CBI.

¶11

CORAM: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE: 24th JANUARY, 2023

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

1. Heard Mr. Rajeev N. Kumar, the Applicant in person,

¶14

Ms. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan, learned counsel for Respondent No.2,
and Smt. M. R. Tidke, learned APP for the State.

¶15

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE MANUSHREE V V NESARIKAR NESARIKAR Date: 2023.01.27 14:44:57 +0530

¶16

2. This is an application with the following prayer :

¶17

Nesarikar

¶18

2 / 7 22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶19

“SP, CBI ACB, Mumbai to comply the order of
29/10/2021 and to return amount of Rs.1,15,000/-
and Rs.30,500/- (i.e. Rs.1,45,500/-) in valid legal
tender or by way of Demand Draft.”

¶20

3. The Applicant had preferred Criminal Application
No.1157 of 2019 in Criminal Appeal No.1376 of 2012. This
Court (Coram : C. V. Bhadang, J.) vide order dated 29/10/2021
had directed the return of amount mentioned at Serial No.8 and
10 of List-2 of the order of learned Special Judge, Greater
Mumbai, dated 26/03/2015. Therefore, this Court had directed
the return of amount of Rs.1,15,000/- and Rs.30,500/- which
were seized from the cabin of the Applicant at the time of the
raid. The amount was directed to be returned to the Applicant
subject to undertaking that the Applicant would bring back the
same if ordered by this Court.

¶21

4. The grievance of the Applicant in this application is
that the currency notes which were seized in 1998 are no more
valid currency notes because of the demonetization in the year

¶22

3 / 7 22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶23

2016. Therefore, he is seeking return of that amount in valid
legal tender.

¶24

5. The contesting Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit-in-
reply. The relevant provisions are quoted in that particular reply.
Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 relied on these
provisions and submitted that appropriate orders be passed. She
relied on the ‘Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Act,
2017’. She particularly relied on section 5 and section 11 of the
said Act, which read as follows :

¶25

“Section 5 -

¶26

On and from the appointed day, no person
shall, knowingly or voluntarily, hold, transfer or receive
any specified bank note :

¶27

Provided that nothing contained in this
section shall prohibit the holding of specified bank
notes -

¶28

(a) by any person -

¶29

(i) up to expiry of the grace period ; or

¶30

(ii) after the expiry of the grace period -

¶31

4 / 7

¶32

22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶33

(A) not more than ten notes in total, irrespective of the denomination;

¶34

or

¶35

(B) not more than twenty-five notes for the purposes of study, research or numismatics;

¶36

(b) by the Reserve Bank or its agencies, or any other
person authorised by the Reserve Bank;

¶37

(c) by any person on the direction of a court in
relation to any case pending in the court.

¶38

Section 11 -

¶39

(1)The Central Government may, by
notification, make rules for carrying out the provisions
of this Act.

¶40

(2)Every rule made under this Act shall be
laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each
House of Parliament while it is in session for a total
period of thirty days which may be comprised in one
session or in two or more successive sessions, and if,
before the expiry of the session immediately following
the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both
Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or
both Houses agree that the rule should not be made,

¶41

5 / 7 22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶42

the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such
modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be, so
however, that any such modification or annulment
shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything
previously done under that rule.”

¶43

6. She submitted that, pursuant to the power u/s 11, the
Central Government has framed Rules which are notified on
12/05/2017. Rule 2 of those Rules, reads thus :

¶44

“2.Deposit of confiscated specified bank notes – Where
specified bank notes have been confiscated or seized by a
law enforcement agencies or produced before a court on or
before the 30th day of December 2016, such specified bank
notes may be tendered, at any office of the Reserve Bank
specified under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Act or
nationalised bank designated by the Reserve Bank for the
said purpose, for deposit in a bank account or exchange of
the value thereof with legal tender, subject to the following
conditions, namely :-

¶45

(a) in case confiscated specified bank notes are
returned by the court to a person who is a party in case
pending before that court, then, the person shall be

¶46

6 / 7 22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶47

entitled, on production of the direction of the court, to
deposit or exchange such specified bank notes, the
serial numbers of which -

¶48

(i) have been noted by the law enforcement agency which confiscated or produced them before the court; and

¶49

(ii) are mentioned in the direction of the court;

¶50

(b) in case specified bank notes are forfeited in
favour of the Central Government or the State
Government by an order of the court, then, that
Government shall be entitled, on production of the
direction of the court, to deposit or exchange such
specified bank notes; or

¶51

(c) in case specified bank notes are placed in custody
of any other person by an order of the court on or
before the 30th day of December, 2016, then, the
person shall be entitled, on production of the direction
of the court, to deposit or exchange such specified bank
notes, the serial numbers of which -

¶52

7 / 7 22-IA-1001-22-IN.odt

¶53

(i)have been noted by the law enforcement
agency which confiscated or produced them
before the court; and

¶54

(ii)are mentioned in the direction of the court.”

¶55

7. She submitted that the amount therefore can be

¶56

returned to the Applicant is valid currency notes by issuing
necessary directions.

¶57

8. Therefore, the Respondent No.2 is directed to follow
the procedures prescribed in the aforesaid Rules and return the

¶58

amount of Rs.1,45,500/- to the Applicant in valid currency
notes.

¶59

9. With these directions, the application is disposed of.

¶60

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Rajeev Kumar S/O N. K. Prasad v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar S/O N. K. Prasad v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Baban Bagal Vs State of Maharashtra

Baliram Dagdu Bhokare Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Namdev @ Shrikant Pandurang Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manoj Mukinda Ahiwale Vs State of Maharashtra

Dattatray Ganpat Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manik Chokhaji Khillare Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.