JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, with the consent of counsel appearing for the parties petition is being heard finally.

2. This Petition takes an exception to the judgment and order dated 19th March 2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court at Mumbai in Revision Application No. 795 of 2016 thereby rejecting the Petitioners application for defreezing the account.

3. It is the case of the Petitioners that, Petitioners so also M/s. Reliance Securities, which is the proprietary concern of Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 3, which is the proprietary concern of Petitioner No. 2, are in the business of trading in government securities and bonds. Petitioner No. 3 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. Petitioners No. 1 and 2 are Promoters and Directors of Petitioner No. 3 Company and Vipul Desai who has been arraigned as accused no. 1 at the relevant time was the Secretary of four different ICICI Bank employees provident funds trusts.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that, between the period from 2004 to 31st March 2010 the Petitioners in collusion and connivance with the Directors of E2E Consultant Private Limited, of which Vipul Desai and his wife Aarti Desai are the directors, sold government securities and corporate bonds to four different ICICI Bank employees provident fund trusts, at a higher rate than the price at which the government securities/corporate bonds could have been purchased by the trusts, and in the process the Petitioners have committed the offence. In pursuance of the above alleged crimes, the First Information Report has been lodged against the present Petitioners and others bearing FIR No. 68/2010 which came to be registered at the instance of ICICI Bank Limited alleging criminal breach of trust / cheating in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy to the tune of Rs.23.33 Crore in the process of dealing with Government Bonds / Securities between the period from April 2004 to 2010.

5. It is the case of the petitioners that, on 25.10.2010 in pursuance of the abovementioned FIR Economic Offences Wing, Unit-III directed ICICI Bank Limited and HDFC Bank limited to freeze the bank accounts of the petitioners with them, and accordingly four accounts of the Petitioners and their firms / companies i.e. B.M. Securities and B.M. Financial Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Came to be frozen by the two banks. While a sum of Rs.2,81,189/- is lying in HDFC Bank account of Reliance Securities, a sum of Rs. 1,50,814.22 is lying in the account of B.M. Securities with ICICI Bank limited and similarly a sum of Rs. 13,97,337.93 is lying in the account of B.M. Financial Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. With HDFC Bank Ltd. and a further sum of Rs. 1,51,694.13 is lying the account of the same company with ICICI Bank. On 25.10.2010 Economic Offences Wing, Unit-III issued notices under Sections 91 and 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and Section 4 of the Bankers Book of Evidence Act, 1891 to the Petitioners for freezzing of their respective bank account lying with the bank with reference to the abovementioned FIR.

6. It is the case of the petitioners that, petitioners preferred an application for defreezing their respective accounts before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court at Esplanade, Mumbai. On 11.07.2016 the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate order below Notice Application No. 25/N/2011 rejected the petitioners application.

7. Being aggrieved by the order of the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate the petitioners preferred the Revision Application. On 19.03.2018 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai rejected the Revision Application No. 795 of 2016 filed by the petitioners. Hence, this Writ Petition.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submit that, the learned Magistrate without analyzing the scope, ambit and purport of Section 102 of Cr.P.C., and in particular