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

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Anita Aggarwal – Petitioner
versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
Cr. Revision No.200 of 2022
Decided on 9.3.2023

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rajeev Chauhan and Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Hemant Vaid, Additional Advocate General, ASI Sandeep Negi, I.O. Police Station Kasauli, present in person

IMPORTANT POINT
Freezing of Bank Account is contingent on fulfilment of certain conditions.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 102 – Freezing of Bank Accounts – Section 102 of Cr.P.C. empowers Police Officer to seize certain property on existence of certain conditions – Such property should have been property which may be alleged or suspected to have been stolen or which may be found under circumstances which create suspicion of commission of any offence – In present case, necessary ingredient empowering the Investigating Officer to seize Bank Accounts of petitioner are missing and seizure/freezing of Bank Accounts of petitioner is not sustainable – There is inordinate delay in concluding investigation and there is no plausible or valid reason to continue seizure/freezing of bank accounts of petitioner – Petitioner is entitled for de-freezing of her accounts. (Paras 15, 16, 19 and 20)

Result: Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.—Petitioner has approached this Court against dismissal of her application, filed before the Magistrate, for release/de-freezing her Saving Bank Accounts bearing No. 39816286371 of State Bank of India and 10610100004166 of Bank of Baroda in Branches at Kasauli, vide impugned order dated 21.2.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasauli.

2. According to status report filed by Station House Officer, Police Station Kasauli, District Solan, H.P., FIR No. 20 of 2020, dated 13.4.2020 was registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code in Police Station Kasauli, on the basis of complaint filed by complainant Vartika Mehta against the petitioner, wherein it was alleged that since about last 5 years petitioner Anita Aggarwal had been contacting Vartika Mehta complainant and she persuaded and impressed the complainant to invest by depositing amount with Adarsh Cooperative Society, with assurance that she (Anita Aggarwal) was an authorized agent for Kasauli for the said Society and there was no need to worry about the money, but lateron, on the date of maturity of invested amount, on contacting by the complainant, Anita Aggarwal started avoiding her. Thereafter, complainant came to know from other residents of the town that Anita Aggarwal had cheated so many persons in the like manner and had not refunded any amount of the investors/depositors.

3. It was further alleged in the complaint that petitioner Anita Aggarwal had contacted complainant Vartika Mehta for opening account of RD etc. in the Post Office also, as she was also authorized agent of the Post Office, but lateron complainant came to know that Anita Aggarwal had cheated her either by depositing lesser amount or by not opening the account or by opening the account for lesser amount. As per complainant, as and when Anita Aggarwal was contacted for repayment of amount, she started misbehaving and abusing.

4. After registration of aforesaid FIR, investigation was carried on. As per status report, inquiry was conducted about the deposit of amount, which was received by Anita Aggarwal from various persons. For that purpose, correspondence took place between Police and Yash Mehta, Area Manager of Adarsh Cooperative Society, Solan. In response Yash Mehta sent record of the Society through e-mail regarding deposit by petitioner Anita Aggarwal in the account of Vartika and other account numbers. Inquiry and verification was conducted by the Police from the Post Office, wherein record of deposit of amount by Anita Aggarwal in the account of Vartika, was also traced.

5. As per status report, Anita Aggarwal received certain amount from Vartika Mehta for deposit in the Post Office, but deposited the same with Adarsh Cooperative Society. In this regard, it has been alleged by the complainant that Anita Aggarwal had done so at her own without informing the depositor of the amount.

6. As per investigation, Anita Aggarwal has been found a registered agent of Credit Cooperative Society, who had received money from the villagers for deposit in Adarsh Cooperative Society.

7. As per status report, amount of Vartika Mehta has been found deposited in the account of Adarsh Credit Cooperative Society. Further that, after closure of Society, agent Anita Aggarwal could not ensure entries of payment of amount since December to March, 2020 and she had offered repayment of the said amount to Vartika Mehta, but Vartika Mehta was asking for payment of entire amount in one go. Deposit of amount in the Post Office was also verified by the Investigating Agency by obtaining record from the Post Office.

8. During investigation, on the basis of communication sent by the Investigating Officer/SHO concerned, above mentioned account numbers of petitioner Anita Aggarwal were ordered to be seized/freezed.

9. Petitioner had approached the Trial Court under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for release/de-freezing of account numbers of the petitioner referred supra. T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top