SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1978 Supreme(SC) 140

V.R.KRISHNA IYER, V.D.TULZAPURKAR
Ram Parkash Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
A.N.Karkhanis, H.S.MARVAH, M.C.BHANDARE, M.N.SHROFF, M.PODVAL, S.Bhandan

JUDGMENT

ORDER:— Leave granted.

2. The short point that arises in this appeal is as to whether the Criminal Court has power to release property seized by the police from a person and reported to the Special Judge, but not yet produced before the Court. We think the court has such power and that seems to be the scheme of the Code itself.

3. Chapter 34 of the Criminal Procedure Code deals with disposal of property. There is a trichotomy in the sense that where property has been seized by the police, but not produced before the court, the power to dispose it of is covered by S. 457. Where property has been seized and/or otherwise produced before the court, the manner to dispose of such property is governed by S. 451. If the question of disposal arises after the enquiry or trial in any criminal court is concluded, the disposal of the property involved in the case is governed by S. 452. We need not go elaborately into the implications of each provision since we are not called upon to do in the present case.

4. Section 457 covers the facts of the present case. The Police recovered a considerable sum of money from the appellant and the money is stated to be seized in connection with an offen






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top