IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.K. MOHAPATRA, J.
N. Laxman – Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha - Opp. Party
CRLMC No.4930 of 2024, CRLMC No.4931 of 2024, CRLMC No.4932 of 2024, CRLMC No.4933 of 2024
Decided On : 01-08-2025
JUDGMENT :
A.K. Mohapatra, J.
1. All these applications involving common question of law and common impugned order are taken up together. For the sake convenience, the facts pleaded in CRLMC No.4930 of 2024 is being discussed hereinbelow to adjudicate the common issue involved in all of the above CRLMC applications.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the applications filed by the Petitioner under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. as well as the documents annexed to the applications.
3. By filing the present applications the Petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent power of this Court to set aside order dated 19.01.2024 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kantabanji thereby confirming the order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kantabanji rejecting the Petitioner’s application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. for release of the cash seized from the possession of the present Petitioner. It has also been prayed for a direction to the learned trial court to release the amount proportionately among the four persons from whose possession such amount has been recovered.
4. The factual background of the present case as culled out from the First Information Report, under Annexure-1 to the CRLMC, is that on 15.09.2022, the S.I. of Kantabanji P.S. while performing patrolling duty, received credible information to the effect that gambling activities were going-on in the locality, particularly, in a hotel in the name and style of Annapurna Lodge. Since the time was an odd hour, it was not possible on the part of the S.I. to obtain arrest warrant from his authority to enter inside the hotel where gambling activities were going on. Since, there was a possibility of the accused persons escaping from the crime scene, the S.I. of police, without wasting any time arranging local witnesses, entered into the hotel premises. Upon entering into the hotel, the informant-S.I. found that gambling activities were going on and the accused persons were playing cards wherein a huge sum of money was involved in betting. Accordingly, the informant informed the I.I.C. of the Kantabanji P.S. over phone, who in turn permitted the informant to carry on the operation. Accordingly, seven persons, who were involved in the alleged crime of gambling activity, were apprehended from the spot. The present Petitioner is one of such persons who was arrested from the spot. Accordingly, an F.I.R. was registered and as per the seizure list a total amount of Rs.58,52,250/- (Rupees Fifty-Eight Lakh Fifty-Two Thousand Two Hundred Fifty) was seized from the spot of occurrence with 4 packets of playing cards. On personal search of the accused persons, some money and mobile phones was also recovered. It has also been alleged that since the accused persons could not account for the money that was lying at the spot of occurrence, the same was seized in presence of the witnesses. Accordingly, the Petitioner and others were charged with the commission of offence punishable under Section 3 of the Orissa Prevention of Gambling (OPG) Act, 1955 (hereinafter “OPG Act”).
5. After the F.I.R. was registered, investigation was commenced. Further, a G.R. case bearing G.R. Case No.376 of 2022 was registered arising out of Kantabanji P.S. Case No.215 of 2022. In the abovenoted G.R. case, the Petitioner along with three others filed separate applications under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. So far as the Petitioner is concerned, CMC No.35 of 2023 was filed by the Petitioner before the learned JMFC, Kantabanji. In the aforesaid application, the Petitioner has stated that he is owner of ‘SSB Bricks’ having brick kiln in Telengana and a valid labour license. It has also been stated that the Petitioner had been to the Kantabanji area in search of labourers to hire for his brick kiln. The money, that was seized, was kept by the Petitioner for the purpose of distribution of wages to the labourers he had co
Property seized in relation to a crime must be released to lawful owners unless substantiated otherwise.
Seized property must be returned to the rightful owner unless justified otherwise, ensuring no deprivation without legal authority, as per Article 300A of the Constitution.
Conditional release of seized articles cannot be denied.
Point of law: Section 451 empowers the court to make orders for interim custody for disposal of the property produced before it during an inquiry or trial. This order may be passed in respect of both....
Money belongs to the organization in view of the silence maintained by the petitioner in claiming the said amount either during the trial or in his statement made under Section 342 of Cr.P.C.
A writ petition for the release of seized money can be granted if ownership is established and the State has no objection, provided an indemnity bond is furnished.
Provisions under Section 457 of Code property which has been seized by police under provision of Code and has not been produced before criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, Magistrate may make s....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.