Dismissed

Dr. Sandeep Gupta v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Mar 2021CRLP/477/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed by a company executive seeking to quash proceedings at the Jagtial police station and direct the unfreezing of his company's bank account. The court held that the investigation was pending with material prima facie against the petitioner and quashing was not called for at this stage. A challenge regarding the freezing procedure was remitted to the

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition No. 477 of 2021 was dismissed; no order on freezing or unfreezing of the bank account was made in this hearing.

Dr. Sandeep Gupta Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 477 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Dr. Sandeep Gupta, S/o. Subhash Gupta, Aged about 43^years, Occ: CEO of Richa Holdings Limited, Having its registered office at 659, Sector 16A, Faridabad, Haryana-121002

¶8

,..PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Through P.S. Jagtial Town Rep by Public Prosecutor, Telangana

¶11

Md. Parvej, S/o. Jaleel, aged about 30^years, R/o. lslampura, Jagtial Town, Occ: DTH Technician

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the l,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to Quash the C.R.No.(F|R No.) 487 of 2020 dated 1111012020 registered by P.S. Jagtial. Town against RICHA HOLDINGS LTD.

¶14

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to exempt the Petitioners from filling the certified copy of the (FlR No.) 487 of 2020 dated 1111012020 registered by P.S. Jagtial Town against the Petitioner herein.

¶16

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased Stay all further proceedings in C.R.No. (FlR No.) 487 of 2020 dated 1111012020 registered by P.S. Jagtial Town against the Petitioner.

¶18

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶19

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the fVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 1 to intimate the YES Bank, Faridabad Branch to de freeze the bank account being A/C No.002084600001420. IFSC Code: YES80000020 of Richa Holdings Ltd.

¶20

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Pranay Sohini, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None appeared for the Respondent No. 2

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 477 0F 202r

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 4g2 of Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in Crime No.48Z of 2020, pending on the file of Jagtial Town police Station, Jagtial District. Dr.Sandeep Gupta, claiming to be the Chiel Executive Officer of Rich Holdings Limited, filed the present Criminal Petition. The offences alleged in the FIR are under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC and Secrions 66, 66(D) and.72 of Information Technologr Act, 2000.

¶26

In the complaint dated Il.lO.2O2O, the allegations

¶27

made by respondent No.2 are as follows:

¶28

(i) Respondent No.2 I de facto complainant is the resident of Jagtial Tou'n and he is DTH Technician.

¶29

(ii) Due to Corona, he does not have any work and therefore, he has suffered with financial problem.

¶30

(iii) On 27.O7.2O2O, he has downloaded, through his VIVO phone bearing No.9502752725, an application called 'Snapit Loan' for the purpose of availing 1oan.

¶31

(iv) He has agreed for the conditions for sanction of the loan and downloaded the required documents in the said app.

¶32

(v) The personnel of the said app have obtained all the contacts of respondent No.2.

¶33

(vi) Respondent No.2 has availed a loan of Rs.5,O0O/- at the first instance. They have deposited an amount of Rs.3,000/- and adjusted the balance amount of Rs.2,000/- towards interest.

¶34

(vii) They gave time of seven days to respondent No.2 to repay the amount.

¶35

¶36

¶37

KL.J Crl. P. No.477 of202 I

¶38

(viii) Respondent No.2_has -availed^{from SnapitLoan App} a

¶39

total amount oi Rs.t,O0,000U -, _ iriJfr, an amount of Rs.40,000/ is only.;"iJ';;^#url'". ._orr,, o, Rs.60,000/ _ is adjusted i"..a.1*Il.i.

¶40

(ix) ff#'ffr-f;:*J:lf due to.corona, the said snapit contact numbers ::i:"9 " Yhut.:opp^{group with the} stvle 'MD p..,"j r;1J;;:il:?j.li'^{in the name anJ}

¶41

(x) By creating the. said group, they have started defaming respondent Nolz.^*.T}..''Lo *.or, *".

¶42

created through mobite N".8sii,Sj;42 and they started threaten i n g .".po"a""i fVoli"ti_rrough mobile phone and also sent, warning _."""g." from mobile Nos. 6366 3 52 78 6, e8 I 86siis-s ;d ;E"r, r ruu ru r.

¶43

(xi) They have also llreal:ned respondent No.2 saying that he failed to repay the l";;;;;;;..

¶44

(xii) Respondent No.2 are ilso "r^.."0 ,nlffi::-11""-",Tlj"the^{said people}

¶45

(xiii) Thus, the said acts . of the personnei of the said and, !"1oi,. therefore, respondent^{Loan App subjected} No.i fi;";;';""tat tri".."qr".ted torturethe Station House office., .lugt,"i'io*i" JJ,,"" Station, rr,".

¶46

Jagtial, to take action in ^;:;;;;;iir,

¶47

On receipt of the said complaint dated 11.10.2020, the Police, Jagtial Town police Station, Jagtial District, have registered a case in Crime No.4g7 of 2O2O for the aforesaid offences. The poiice have shown the accused in column No.7 i.e., details of known/suspected/unknown accused as ,some un-known offender (Snapit Loan Apps Cell: 8810556047), threat calls from 6366352786, 9818633793 and 9311266868'. Thereafter, the police, Jagtial, have took up rnvestigation.

¶48

4, During the course of investigation, the police found that the said transactions of payment of loan and repayment of

¶49

KL,J Crl.P.No..177 of 2021

¶50

¶51

loan are through online^{paymentinvirtual etccount} No.22233300448O7362 and^{beneficiary of the account as} Richa Holding Limited Company.^{During the course of} investigation, the Investigation Officer^{has also recordedthe} statements of several witnesses/^{victims of the said loan app} and also collected the statement of^{account of the said Richa} Holding Limited Company with account No.002084600001420 of Faridabad^{Branch, Haryana.}

¶52

According to Investigation Officer, the^{statements of} victims have corroborated with the contents^{of FIR. He has} also collected screenshot^photos of Snapit^{Loan App and the} beneficiary details from the complainant^{mobile phonein} presence of two mediators and notices were sent to^the concerned bank and obtained virtual^{accountholder nominee} by name Richa Holding Limited Company.^{During the course} of investigation, the Investigating^{Officerhas also collected} PAN card and Yes bank check of^{the said RichaHolding} Limited Company and notices^{were sent to the Nodal Officers} arrd obtained CDRs of accused^{mobile numbers.On} analyzing the CDRs and tower locations,^{it was established} that the accused^persons are^{operatingfrom Faridabad.} During the course of investigation,^{the InvestigationOfficer} has also added Sections^{420 and 384 of IPC to the above said} primary sections.

¶53

¶54

¶55

KL,J 1 Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶56

In the written instructions^{dated 27.01.2021 submitted} by Sub-Inspector of^{Police, Jagtial Town Police Station,the} Investigating Officer in^{Crime No.487 of 2O20, it is statedthat} this is a case^{where legitimate business is used for as a front} to conduct i11ega1 and^{unlicensedlending operationsat} exorbitant interest^{throughloan apps. Respondent No'2} availed an amount of^{Rs'40,000/- throughthe said Snapit} Loan App and the interest^{iate is 0.98 per day i'e', 357oh per} year. The modus operandi^{of the accused is in commission of} the offence is as^follows:

¶57

"a. A virtual^{accountis created using Razor Pay' This} virtual account is^{generatedin the fly'}

¶58

b. Using multiple^{virtual account to collecthigh money} from vic-tims and^{channeledinto some background} account.

¶59

c. Money from^{the background accountis transferredto} primary holding account."

¶60

7 . In the written instructions,^{the Investigating Officer has} further stated that though^{FIR does not contain the name of} Richa Holding Limited^{Company,during the course of} investigation, it revealed^{that the said Richa Holding Limited} Company and its^{employeesare the persons committing crime} under Sections 384,^{420 and 506 of IPC and Sections66,} 66(D) and 72 of lT^{Act. The KYC customerof Richa Holding} Limited Company clearly^{shows that the virtual account and} the primary account^{run by the accused'The investigation} has shown the possibility^{of other virtualaccounts and the} background account^{need to be identified'Further}

¶61

¶62

KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶63

investigation would^provide material^{to accused to tamperthe} data. The bank account statement^{shows that the account} freezed i.e., account number ending with 01420^{Yes Bank,} Faridabad, is a primary bank account.^Due to^mistake/over confidence of the accused and daily investigation, the^primary account has been captured in the present^case unlike^other Cyber Crime where there are too many layers of^back account. It is further stated that they have also requested^the Reserve Bank of India to send certain information and^the same is awaited. According to him, investigation is^pencling. As per the investigation done so far,^prima facie,^{reveaied the} involvement of the petitioner herein, Director of the said^Richa Holding Limited Company, and also its employees.^'lhe investigation is pending and the same may not be interdicted at the crime stage.

¶64

By referring to the said written instructions submitted by the Investigating Officer in Crime No.487^of 2O2O,^{and also} referring to the statements of victims, learned^Public Prosecutor would submit that the matter is at crime^stage and investigation is pending and the Investigating Officer^is collecting the information from the various^{sources including} banks, Reserve Bank of India, etc. According to him,^{there is} prima facie case against the petitioner and also the involvement of the petitioner and the employees of the^said

¶65

I t

¶66

KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of²⁰²¹

¶67

¶68

Richa Holding Limited^{Company andthereforethe} investigation may^{not be interdicted at this stage'}

¶69

g . Learned Fublic^{Prosecutor, on instructions,would} further submit that^{the Telangana State have received several} complaints with^{regarcl to loan app fraud and the petitioner} herein, CEO of Richa^{Holding LimitedCompany,has involved} in four crimes and matter^{is underinvestigation' The Police} are having every right^{to freeze the account under Sections 91} and 102 of Cr.P.C.^{Placing ,.liur,." of the common judgment} of this Court in^{W.P.Nos. 13363 of 2Q2O and 10565of 2020} dated 03.12.2020,^{confirmedby aDivision Bench in} W.A.No.564 of 2O2O^{dated 21.12.2020, learned Public} Prosecutor would submit^{that the Police are having power to} freeze lhe account^{as part of investigationunder Sections91} and i02 of Cr.P.C.^{He would further submit that the} petitioner herein has^{cheatedthe innocentvictims and the} Investigating Officer^{has recordedthe statements of several} victims. Thus, the^{allegations levelled againstthe petitioner} are serious in nature^{and thereforethe presentCriminal} Petition may be dismissed.

¶70

On the other hand,^{Sri Pranay Sohini, learned counsel} for the petitioner,^{would submit that the name of the} petitioner is not there either in^{the complaintor in any} document. The^{petitioner and the said Richa Holding Limited} Company are nothing^{to do with the said loan app' Said}

¶71

KL.J Crl.P.No.47? o1202^I

¶72

Richa Holding Limited^{Company is a public limited company,} registered with Reserve Bank^{of India and it is a non-banking} financial company. It is classified^{as an investmentand} credit company. It is being^{carried out its operations from} Faridabad, Haryana State and it^{has no office in Hyderabad} and it is not associated with^{any Hyderabad based company'} Even then, the Investigating^{Officerhas freezed the account of} the said Richa Holding Limited^{Company on 07.01.2019 i.e.,} account No.002084600001420 of^{Yes Bank,Faridabad} Branch with iFSC Code YESB0000020.^{The said account was} freezed under Sections 91 and 102 ol Cr.P.C.^{The said Richa} Holding Limited Company, vide its reply^{dated O9.Ol.2O2l,} requested the Investigating Officer to^{defreeze itsaccount} stating that they will cooperate with the^{investigation.} Despite receiving and acknowledging the said^{reply dated} 09.Ol.2O2t through e-mail, the Investigating^{Officer neither} defreezed the account nor responded^{to it.}

¶73

I 1. According to learned counsel, the petitioner^herein,CEO of the said Richa Hotding Limited, and the^{said companyare} nothing to do with the present offences.^{The contentionof the} Investigating Officer that the virtual account^{bearing account} No.2223330044807362 of RBL bank belongs to the^petitioner or the said Richa Holdings Limited Company is false^and baseless. The petitioner herein and Richa Holding Limited are not\ing to do with the said account. Therefore freezing of the

¶74

KL'J Crl.P.No.477 of²⁰²¹

¶75

¶76

account^{of the said Richa HoldingLimitedCompany under} Sections 91 and^{102 of Cr'P'C', by the InvestigatingOfficer is} i1lega1 and^{contrary to the procedure iaid down thereon'The} Investigating^{Officerhas obtained all the bank account details} ofbalkersofRichaHoldingLimitedCompanyandthesame would reveal^{that the said Richa HoldingLimitedCompany} never had^{any financial transaction so mentioned' as such' it} is clear that^{the said Richa HoldingLimitedCompanyhas} been falsely^{arrayed as the accused'He wouldfurthersubmit} thatthesaidRichaHoldingLimitedCompany,videe-mail dated:l4,o1.202:.,requestedthelnvestigatingofficerto relevant^{information and also declaration} provide al1^the with Reserve^{Bank of India and list of} submitted^{bY it} application.

¶77

L2. Learned^{counsel for the petitionerwould furthersubmit} that due to^{illegal action of the investigating Officer in Crime} No.487 of^{2O2O, the entire operationsof the said Richa} Holding Limited^{Company have come to standstill' sincehe} has freezed^{the bank account of the said Richa Holding} Limited Company.^{Therefore'the said companyis not in a} position to^{pay salaries to its employees and facing problems} in performing^{its regularbusiness activities'He would} further submit^{that despite receiving specific request and also} the undertaking^{given by the said Richa HoidingLimited} Company^{stating thatthey willcooperate withthe}

¶78

¶79

KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of202l

¶80

¶81

Investigating Officer in concluding the investigation in^Crime No.487 of 2O2O, the Police are not acting upon it and^not defreezing the account of the petitioner.^{With the said} submissions, learned counsei for the^petitioner seeks^to quash the proceedings in Crime No.487 of 2O2O.

¶82

The above stated facts would reveal that on the compiaint dated 11.10.2O2O lodged by respondent No.2,^the Police, Jagtial, registered a case in Crime No.487 of 2O2O initially for the offences under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC and Sections 66, 66(D) and 72 of the IT Act. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has added Sections 420 and 384 of IPC. Initiaily, the crime was registered by showing the accused as 'some unknown offender (Snapit Loan Apps Cell: 88105560471, threat calls from 6366352786, 9818633793 and 9311266868'. In the complaint, respondent No.2 has specifically mentioned that he has downioaded an app called Snapit Loan from his VIVO mobile phone bearing No.9502752725 with an intention to avail loan, since he was suffering with financial^problems due to COVID- 19, pandemic situation. He has agreed for the conditions of the said loan app and downloaded the required documents in the application for the purpose of availing loan. They have also taken the contact numbers of respondent N;.2. Initially they have agreed to pay Rs.S,OOO/- and accordingiy, they have transferred an amount of Rs.3,OO0/-

¶83

¶84

it)

¶85

KL.J Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶86

only by adjusting Rs.2,000/- towards interest. They have given seven days time to repay the amount. In all, respondent No.2 has availed a tota_l amount of Rs. 1,00,000/_. Though they have sanctioned Rs.1,00,000/-, they have paid Rs.4O,0O0/- only. Thus, they have adjusted an amount of Rs.6O,0OO/- towards inteqest and demanded respondent No.2 to pay Rs.1,00,000/-. They have created WhatsApp group with the contact numbers of respondent No.2 in the name and style 'MD Parvej Thief Fraud Cost, and started defaming and threatening respondent No.2 by sending WhatsApp messages and also through phone calls and also damaged the reputation of respondent No.2. Thus, respondent No.2 has specifically mentioned the mobile numbers, loan app particuiars, amount received, amount paid, etc.

¶87

During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has issued a notice dated 02.01.2021 under Sections 91 arrd lO2 of Cr.P.C., to the Manager of yES Bank, Kukatpaily Branch, Hyderabad. requesting him to furnish the details of account No.0020846OOOOL42O with IFSC code YESBO00OO20. He has also sought the details such as account opening particulars with contact number, SMS activation number of the account holder, etc., which are specifically mentioned therein, including KyC details of the account.

¶88

¶89

KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶90

1 5. During the course of investigation, after coming to a prima facie conclusion, the Investigating Officer has freezed the said account through e-mail dated OZ.Ot.2O2I. A similar notice was issued to the Manager of yES Bank, Faridabad, dated 07.01.2021 under Sections 91 and lO2 of Cr.p.C., seeking information from the said bank. Thereafter, the said Richa Holding Limited Company, vide their e_maii dated 09.O1.2021, requested the Investigating Officer to defreeze the account stating that they wili cooperate with him. They have also addressed similar letter dated 14.Ol.2O2l.

¶91

The correspondence between the petitioner, Richa Holding Limited Company and the Investigating Officer would reveal that the investigation is pending and the Investigating Officer has addressed letters and issued notices under Sections 91 and IO2 of Cr.p.C., to the Reserve Bank of India seeking information and also yES Bank, Kukatpally Branch, Hyderabad and Faridabad Branch, to furnish certain information such as KyC particulars, etc., and to freeze the account of Richa Holding Limited Company. Vide letter dated 18.O1.2O21, the said Richa Holding Limited Company informed the Manager of RBL Bank (formerly Ratnakar Bank Limited), Faridabad that they never opened any account with RBL and neither they had given any request to link their bank account No.0O2O846OOOOl42O with the said virtual account No.2223330044807362 being operated in the name of Richa

¶92

t2 KI-,J Crl. P.No.477 of 2021

¶93

Holding Limited Company in the^{said RBL bank.By} mentioning the same, the^{said Richa Holding Limited} Company requested the^{Managerof RBL Bank,Faridabadto} furnish the details such as account,^{branch, KYC details,etc.} Even the said details are awaited^{from the said bank. Thus,} the above said facts would reveal that^{there are several} factual aspects to be investigated^{into by the Investigating} Officer. According to the^{learned PublicProsecutor,the} petitioner herein, CEO of the said Richa^{Holding Limited} Company, has invoived in four cases.^{All the matters belong} to ioan app fraud. According^{to the Investigating Officer, the} rate of interest of Snapit Loan App^{is 0.98%per day, which} comes to 357o/o per annum.^{The modus operandiof the} accused is also specifically mentioned^{by the Investigating} Officer, as stated above.

¶94

It is not in dispute that^{the InvestigatingOfficeris} having power to add any^{person/entityas accused and also to} add any Section of law during the^{course of investigation.} Though the name of the^{said Richa Holding Limited Company} and the petitioner, CEO of the^{said company, is not there in} the FIR, the Police have mentioned^{that 'some un-known} offender^(Snapit Loan^{Apps Cel1: 88 10556047).According to} the Police, during the course^{of investigation, they found that} the said transactions mentioned^{by respondent No.2 in his} complaint were through^{onlinepayment in virtual account}

¶95

¶96

1.3 KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶97

No.2223330044807362 and the beneficiary of the said account is Richa Holding Limited Company. Therefore, they are investigating into the said aspects after obtaining the information from the various banks and also from the Reserve Bank ol India. During the course of investigation, they have freezed the back account of the said Richa Holding Limited Company.

¶98

The Apex Court in a recenr judgment in Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar Vs, The State of Maharashtrat held that quashing criminal proceedings was called for only in a case where complaint did not disclose any offence, or was frivolous, vexatious, or oppressive. If allegations set out in complaint did not constitute offence of which cognizance had been taken by Magistrate, ir r.r,as open to High Court to quash same. It was not necessary that, a meticulous analysis of case should be done before trial to find out whether case would end in conviction or acquittal. If it appeared on a reading of complaint and considerarion of ailegations therein, in light of the statement made on oath that the ingredients of the offence are disclosed, there would be no justification for High Court to interfere. The defences that might be available, or facts/aspects which when established during trial, might lead to acquittal, were not grounds for quashing complaint at threshold. At that stage, only question relevant was whether averm?nts in complaint spell out ingredients of a criminal '^{(20t9)l4 scc 350}

¶99

¶100

KL,J Crl. P.No.477^of202l

¶101

¶102

offenceornot.TheCourthastoconsiderwhethercomplaint discioses lhat^pima facie,^{otfences that were alleged against} Respondents.^{Correctnessor otherwise of said ailegations} had to be decided^{only in trial. At initial stageof issuance of} process, it was not^{open to Courts to stifle proceedings by} entering into^{merits of the contentionsmade on behalfof} Accused. Criminal^{complaints couldnot be quashed only on} ground that,^{allegations made therein appear to be of a civil} nature. If ingredients^{of offence allegedagainst Accused were} prima facie made^{out in complaint, criminal proceeding shall} not be interdicted.

¶103

In view^{of the authoritative principle of iaw laid down by} the Hon'ble^{Apex Court,as discussedabove,prima facie'there} are specific^{allegations in the complaintlodged by respondent} No.2. During the^{course of investigation, pima facie' the} Investigating Officer^{came to a conclusionthat the petitioner} herein, CEO^{of the said RichaHolding Limited Company'and} its employees^{have involvedin the offence' They have a-1so} addressed letters^{to Reserve Bank of India and YES Bank'} Kukatpally Branch^{and Faridabad Branch and also to RBL} Bank, Faridabad^{Branch, to furnishcertain information'} They have issued^{notices under Sections 91 and 102 of} Cr.P.C., to the^{said bank and freezehthe bank account of} Richa Holding^{Limited Compary' Thus, there is pima facie}

¶104

a I l ----'---'-it!

¶105

KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶106

¶107

material against the petitioner herein, Richa Holding Limited Company and its employees.

¶108

In the complaint dated 11.1O.2O2O, and also in the written instructions of the Investigating Officer, there is specific mention about the mobile numbers, App name, account numbers, including the virtual account number and other particulars. Admittedly, investigation is pending. There are several factual aspects to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer. Thus, it is not proper for this Court to quash the proceedings in Crime No.4g7 of 2O2O and to interdict the investigation in the said crime in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr.p.C. Thus, the petitioner has failed to establish any ground to quash the proceedings in Crime No.487 of 2O2O and hence, the Criminal petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶109

2I. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Investigating Officer has not fo11o,,r,ed the procedure laid down under Section lO2 of Cr.p.C., more particularly subsection (3) of Section 102 of Cr.p.C., and he has not intimated freezing of the bank account of the petitioner, as mandated under Section 102(3) of Cr.p.C.

¶110

In view of the above said submission, it is relevant to note Section 702 of Cr.p.C., which deals with power of police officer to seize certain property. As per Section 102(3) of

¶111

I6 KL,J Crl.P.No.477 of 2021

¶112

Cr.P.C., every police officer acting under sub- section (1) shal1 forthwith report the seizure to the Magistrate having jurisdiction and where the property seized is such that it cannot be conveniently transported to the Court, he may give custody thereof to any person on his executing a bond undertaking to produce the property before the Court as and when required and to give effect to the further orders of the Court as to the disposal of the same. Further, the notice under Sections 91 and 102 of Cr.P.C., issued by the Investigating Officer is not under cha-llenge. There is no mention about non-following of the said procedure by the Investigating Officer in the present Criminal Petition. 'The petitioner filed the present Criminal Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in Crime No.487 of 2020. Hence, it is open to the petitioner to approach the learned I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jagtial, by way of filing an appropriate application seeking to defreeze of account by raising all the grounds raised herein and also the ground that the Investigating Officer has not followed the procedure laid down under Section 102(3) of Cr.P.C

¶113