The interpretation of the power of seizure under Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. and the definition of 'property' within the meaning of the said section, as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, influenced the court's decision in upholding the freezing of the accounts.

JUDGMENT :

B. K. Nayak, J. - In all these applications under Section 482, Cr.P.C., the petitioners challenge the orders passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Chatrapur in different applications under Section 457, Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners in G.R, Case No. 258 of 2015, arising out of Chatrapur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2015, which was later converted to CID, CB, Cuttack P.S. Case No. 28 of 2015, rejecting such applications of the petitioners for release of their different bank and postal accounts, which were frozen by the CID, CB, Cuttack in connection with the investigation of the case. The impugned orders in CRLMC No. 1038,1039,1040 and 1037 of 2016 were passed by the learned S.D.J.M. on 05.02.2016, whereas in respect of other applications the impugned orders were passed on 16.02.2016. The main accused is Surababa @ Surendranath Mishra, the petitioner in CRLMC No. 1272 of 2016, and the other petitioners are family members such as, wife, sons, daughter and daughter-in-law of the said main accused. The impugned orders have been passed in one G.R. Case on identical grounds and all the Section 482, Cr.P.C. applications were heard analogously and, therefore, all these petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The G. R. Case, corresponding to Chatrapur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2015 was registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged by the informant alleging to the following effect:

The informant started visiting the Ashram of Surababa @ Surendranath Mishra, namely, Trahi Achyut Ashram at Jhinti for treatment of his insane son. The accused Surendranath Mishra assured that by performing some pooja he can cure the son of the informant. Accordingly he treated the informant's son for three to four days by performing some pooja in the Ashram. There the petitioner asked the informant to donate some land at Chatrapur for opening a branch of petitioner's ashram. In view of the promise given by accused Surendranath Mishra to cure his son, the informant agreed to donate A 0.970 of land appertaining to different plots situated at Chatrapur bypass road in favour of Trahi Achyut Ashram Trust. It is further alleged-that accordingly accused Trilochan Mishra, S/o. accused Surendranath Mishra and another person, namely, Debiprasad Rath of Trahi Achyut Nagar came to the office of Sub-Registrar, Chatrapur on 12.04.2014 for the purpose of execution and registration of the gift deed by the informant. They prepared the deed and got the signatures of the informant and his son on the same leading them to believe that it was a deed of gift. At a subsequent point of time the informant came to know that accused Trilochan Mishra and his companion fraudulently prepared a sale deed and got the signatures of the informant and his son thereon, with the recitals that a consideration of Rs. 26,84,570/- was laid to the informant towards the sale consideration, though the informant had never received a single rupee. The informant's son was however not cured and when the informant intimated the said fact to accused Surendranath Mishra and also about the fraud committed in the transfer of the property, the said accused turned a dead ear ad that accused Trilochan Mishra and Debiprasad Rath also threatened the informant that in case he discloses the fact to anybody, he and his son would lose their lives.

On the basis of the aforesaid allegations in the F.I.R. case was registered for commission of offences under Sections 420/423/467/468/471/406/506/120-B/34, IPC.

3. During investigation the Crime Branch took over investigation of the case as per the CID, CB Office Order dated 04.09.2015 and registered CID, CB, Cuttack P.S. Case No. 28 of 2015 for offences punishable under Sections 420/ 423/467/468/471 /506/120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC. During such investigation it came to light that about more than three decades back the accused Surendranath Mishra declared that he had received a "POTHI' of Mahapurusha Achyutananda from one Sadhubaba and he could predict the future o