Criminal courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate civil title or possessory disputes concerning immovable property. Provisions in the police legislation regarding unclaimed property pertain solely to movable assets and vest authority exclusively in the executive, rather than the judicial, magistracy.

Judgment :

Kausik Chanda, J.

The present revisional application raises a question of considerable significance touching upon the jurisdictional limits of criminal courts vis-a-vis disputes concerning possession and custody of immovable property purportedly treated as “unclaimed property” by the police authorities under the provisions of the Police Act, 1861.

2. The application has been preferred challenging the judgment and order dated 23rd June, 2025 passed by the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, 8th Court at Alipore, South 24 Parganas in Criminal Appeal No. 92 of 2024 whereby the Learned Appellate Court was pleased to affirm the order dated 18th January, 2024 passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore in connection with Tollygunge Police Station General Diary Entry No. 2483 dated 28th August, 2012 directing handing over of the keys and interim possessory control of premises situated at 159, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700026 in favour of opposite party no. 2.

3. The records reveal that one Nirmalya Sasmal, who admittedly resided at the aforesaid premises, was found lying unconscious on 28th August, 2012. He was removed to SSKM Hospital where he was declared dead. It appears from the materials on record that the local police authorities of Tollygunge Police Station, apprehending theft or unlawful trespass into the premises where several valuables and articles were allegedly lying unattended, locked the premises and kept the keys in police custody upon making General Diary Entry No. 2483 dated 28th August, 2012.

4. The petitioner claims himself to be the step-brother of the deceased and asserts that he performed the cremation and last rites of the deceased. Opposite party no. 2, on the other hand, claims himself to be the son of the deceased and asserts a superior right over the premises.

5. The records further disclose that on 10th September, 2012, the police authorities informed the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate regarding the General Diary Entry and the action taken by them. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate seeking custody of the keys. The matter remained pending for an unusually long period of time.

6. Thereafter, on 10th October, 2023, opposite party no. 2 entered appearance before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate claiming himself to be the son of the deceased and sought custody of the keys of the premises. Pursuant thereto, a police verification report was called for and submitted before the Learned Magistrate. The report indicated that upon verification from the Election Commission records, PAN records, UIDAI details and the birth certificate issued by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, opposite party no. 2 prima facie appeared to be the son of the deceased.

7. Upon consideration of the said report, the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by order dated 18th January, 2024 directed handing over of the keys of the premises to opposite party no. 2 “for his use” upon furnishing a bond and undertaking. Being ag