JUDGMENT

G. B. PATTANAIK, J. — Leave granted.

2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.4.1997 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Application No. 826 of 1996. The said criminal applica¬tion along with four other criminal writ petitions involving the same question of law were decided together and disposed of by the common judgment which is being impugned by this appeal. The short question that arose before the High Court is whether a police officer investigating into an offence can issue prohibitory order in respect of the bank account of the accused in exercise of power under Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

3. So far as Criminal Application No. 826 of 1996 is con¬cerned, the short facts are that one Tapas D. Neogy was an Archi¬tect and Town Planner in the Department of Town Planning of the Union Territory of Daman and Diu. CBI, ACB, Mumbai registered three first information reports against the said Tapas Neogy and three others for offences under Sections 120-B, 467, 468, 471 and 420, IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It was alleged that the accused committed the offence while on duty and while he was posted as Architect and Town Planner under Government of Daman. The original plan of Daman was prepared by the Department of Architecture and Planning and was approved by the Town and Coun¬try Planning Board. In the approved plan, various zones were earmarked for industries, roads, defence, agriculture etc. It was further alleged that out of a total area of land, 7.25% was earmarked for industries and 41.21% for agriculture and open space. The zoning could be changed by the Town and Country Plan¬ning Board. The procedure to alter the agricultural land into non-agricultural land was that the landowners who wished to change their land to non-agricultural use were required to apply to the Collector, who was the competent authority to grant such permission. Such applications were then forwarded to the Town Planning Department for the purpose of clearance. It was further alleged that Tapas Neogy and accused Narayan Divakar entered into a conspiracy by which Divakar caused a forged map of Daman to be prepared, thereby increasing the industrial zone. On the basis of the same forged map, accused Tapas Neogy issued false certifi¬cates indicating that the land fell within the industrial zone. On account of such act, the land prices shot up from Rs. 100 to Rs. 110 per square metre to Rs. 800 to Rs. 1600 per square metre, and in the process, accused Divakar and accused Tapas Neogy caused pecuniary advantage to be gained by the landowners. Pursuant to the first information report, the premises of Tapas Neogy at Daman were searched on 12.10.1993 and several incrimi¬nating documents were seized. On the same day, the premises of the mother of accused Tapas Neogy at Calcutta was also searched and certain documents were seized. The locker in Indian Bank at Calcutta, jointly held by Tapas Neogy’s mother and his brother was also searched and was sealed and another locker held by the mother and sister of Tapas was searched and was also sealed. The investigating officer issued instructions to the Managers of different banks not to allow the accounts to be operated upon. The mother of Tapas then filed an application before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, under Section 457, Cr.P.C. to allow her to operate the bank ac¬count and for return of the documents and articles seized, claim¬ing that they belonged to her. The Magistrate by his order dated 13.10.1995, granted the relief in respect of the locker in ques¬tion but refused to allow the mother of the said Tapas Neogy to operate the bank account. The Magistrate was of the view that he had no inherent power and, therefore, has no jurisdiction to allow to grant the relief sought under Section 457 of the Crimi¬nal Procedure Code. Against the said or