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

2023 Supreme(Pat) 923

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANDEEP KUMAR, J.
Cr. WJC No.1526 of 2022 with 359 of 2023
(8.11.2023)
Sukhdani Devi (in 1526)
Abha @ Abha Dubey (in 359) ... Petitioners
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
(in both)

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s P.N. Shahi, Sr. Adv.,(in 1526, 359); Sanjeev Kumar Mishra (in 1526); Manini Jaiswal(in 359).
For the State : M/s Manish Kumar, G.P.-4(in 1526, 359); Deepak Kumar, A.C. to G.P.-4 (in 1526); Manoj Kumar, A.C. to G.P.-4 (in 359).
For the Vigilance : Mr. Rana Vikram Singh (in both).
For the EOU : M/s Vishwanath Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv., Soni Srivastava(in both).

Headnote:

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988–Section 18-A read with Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944–Section 3 & Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973–Section 102–Whether the seizure/freezing of bank accounts (of the petitioners), who are mother and wife of the main accused, under Section 102 of the Cr.P.C When the Criminal Case has been instituted under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act is legal or not and whether the immovable property can be attached under Section 102 of the Cr.P.C pursuant to institution of a criminal case–from conjoint reading of the provisions of Section 18-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also the provisions of Section 3 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1944, it is clear that procedure for attachment of property or confiscation of property acquired or procured by means of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the procedure prescribed under the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1944 shall apply and the prevention fo corruption Act being a complete code and a special Act will prevail over the provisions of Section 102 of the Cr.P.C so far as it relates to the attachment or seizure of property when the accused is facing prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988–the provision of Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. so far it relates to confiscation and freezing are specified under the Prevention of Corruption Act–any attachment of property which are subject matter of crime under the Prevention of Corruption Act can only be done under the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 and not under the provisions of Section 102 Cr.P.C–applications allowed–freezing of the bank accounts of the petitioners held illegal and the prayer for the release of the same allowed–impugned orders set aside–however, respondents given liberty to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law. (Paras 16 & 19)

(2019) 20 SCC 199, 2021 (3) Crimes 339 (S.C.), (1999) 7 SCC 685, (2018) 2 SCC 372, (Cril. Rev. Petn. No. 14/2021 D/- 18.1.2022–Referred.

Sandeep Kumar, J. – Since the issue involved in both these criminal writ petitions is common, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In Cr.W.J.C. No.1526 of 2022, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 10.08.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna, in Special Case No. 36 of 2021, arising out of E.O.U. P.S. Case No.17 of 2021, by which the prayer to release/de-freeze all the bank accounts of the petitioner has been rejected save and except the pension account of the petitioner. Further prayer has been made by the petitioner to direct the investigating agency to release the following bank accounts of the petitioner: –

(i) SB-625901135776 maintained in ICICI Bank, Boring Road, Patna.

(ii) SB-10027601509 maintained in S.B.I. PBB Branch, Patna.

(iii) SB-37072137868 maintained in SBI, PBB Branch, Patna.

(iv) SB-34939414822 (pension account) maintained in SBI, PBB Branch, Patna.

(v) SB-040401011017 maintained in ICICI Bank, Boring Road, Patna.

(vi) SB-20682337109 maintained in Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank), Jasidih Branch.

3. In Cr.W.J.C. No.359 of 2023, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna, in Special Case No. 36 of 2021, arising out of E.O.U. P.S. Case No.17 of 2021, by which the prayer to release all bank accounts of the petitioner has been rejected. Further prayer has been made by the petitioner to release the following bank accounts of the petitioner: –

(i) SB-18630100010346 maintained in the Bank of Baroda, S.K. Puri Branch, Patna.

(ii) PPF No.30116364090 maintained in SBI, S.K. Puri Branch, Patna.

(iii) SB-915010029503784 maintained in the Axis Bank, Boring Road, Patna.

(iv) Fixed Deposit bearing No. 18630300038779 maintained in the Bank of Baroda, S.K. Puri Branch, Patna.

(v) Fixed Deposit being No. 18630300055544 maintained in the Bank of Baroda, S.K. Puri Branch, Patna.

(vi) Fixed Deposit bearing No. 18630300037806 maintained in the Bank of Baroda, S.K. Puri Branch, Patna.

4. These criminal writ petitions arise out of the a criminal case vide E.O.U. P.S. Case No. 17 of 2021 lodged against one Rakesh Kumar Dubey, the then Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara, for possessing assets both moveable and immovable disproportionate to his known source of income and subsequently, the bank accounts of both the petitioners, who are mother and wife of accused Rakesh Kumar Dubey, have been frozen by the Economic Offences Unit (for short “E.O.U.”) under Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with aforesaid case. The aforesaid case i.e. E.O.U. P.S. Case No. 17 of 2021 has been registered under sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the criminal case has been registered against accused Rakesh Kumar Dubey under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, so the action of freezing the bank accounts of the petitioners, who are mother and wife of the petitioner, can only be done under Section 18-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which came into force w.e.f. 27.06.2018, and for this provisions, modality and process as mentioned in Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 has been adopted in Section 18-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners draws the attention of this Court to Section 18-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which provides that “save as otherwise provided under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 shall, as far as may be, apply to the attachment, administration of attached property and execution of order of attachment or confiscation of money or property procured by means of an offence under this Act. For the purpose of this Act, the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 shall have the effect, subject to the modification that refer

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 Back to top