The main legal point established is the need for accountability and conditions for the release of seized documents and deposits during a pending investigation of disproportionate assets.

P. K. TRIPATHY, J.

( 1 ) ALL the aforesaid Criminal misc. Cases are as against rejection of the applications under Section 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code (in short, the Code) on 22-12-2001 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambalpur in connection with sambalpur Vig. G. R. Case Nos. 61 and 64 of 2001. Maheswar Kar, petitioner in CRMC no. 3217 of 2002 is the accused in the said vig. G. R. Case. Rajkumari Panigrahi, petitioner in CRMC No. 927 of 2002 is his sister-in-law being his wifes younger sister. She is a married woman. Snehaprabha panigrahi, petitioner in CRMC No. 928 of 2002 is the mother-in-law of the accused. She is a pensioner. Abharani Panigrahi, petitioner in CRMC No. 3232 of 2002 is the wife of the accused and Debasis Panigrahi, petitioner in CRMC No. 3233 of 2002 is the brother-in-law of the accused, being his wifes younger brother.

( 2 ) ALL the aforesaid Crl. Misc. Cases were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order.

( 3 ) VIGILANCE Department conducted a raid in the house (quarter) of the accused while he was serving at Rourkela as the District labour Officer and on 3-5-2001 and 4-5- 2001 seized large number of documents consisting of bank deposits, valuable securities, fixed deposits etc. amounting to nearly half a crore of rupees. While the matter is still under investigation the investigating agency is of prima facie opinion that the accused possesses disproportionate assets to the tune of about 38 lakhs and that includes keeping money benami as well as in joint accounts in the names of his wife and in- laws.

( 4 ) THE accused and his aforesaid relatives filed five separate misc. cases u/s. 457 of the Code for release of the bank pass books, fixed deposits, Kisan Vikas Patras etc. as per certain items of the seizure lists of 3-5-2001 and 4-5-2001 (the details of such documents and their serial numbers in the seizure lists have been noted in the respective impugned orders ). Each of the petitioners contended that the money due on such documents and deposits are their self earning. Each of them also stated that the fixed deposits and the deposits like Kisan Vikas patras have become matured for encashment and therefore such documents and valuable securities be released in their favour to operate the accounts and to encash the deposits. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has rejected all such applications on the self-same ground that because of the pendency of the investigation and allegation of huge amount of disproportionate assets it will not be appropriate to release such documents in favour of the respective petitioners.

( 5 ) IN course of argument Mr. D. K. Mohapatra, learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department advanced stiff resistance to the prayer of the petitioners for release of the said pass books and fixed deposits etc. on the ground on which learned c. J. M. rejected the applications of the petitioners. He also relied on the ratio in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D. Neogy, 1999 AIR SCW 3389 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 1352 : (1999 Cri LJ 4305 ). In that case, honble Apex Court has considered the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer u/s. 102 of the Code to seize or prohibit operation of the bank account. The Honble Apex court is of the view that :"it is well know that corruption in public offices has become so rampant that it has become difficult to cope with the same. Then again the time consumed by the Courts in concluding the trials is another factor which should be borne in mind in interpreting the provisions of Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the underlying object engrafted therein, inasmuch as if there can be no order of seizure of the bank account of the accused then the entire money deposited in a bank which is ultimately held in the trial to be the outcome of the illegal gratification, could be withdrawn by the accused and the Courts would be powerless to get the said money which has any direct link with the commission of the offenc