The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of law enforcement agencies to comply with court orders regarding the deposit and release of confiscated funds, especially in the context of demonetization.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

1. Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to set aside order dated 03.03.2023 (Annexure P4) passed by learned JMIC, Ludhiana and to order the release of Rs. 13,80,000/- in favour of the petitioner in view of the order dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court in CRM-M-28713-2017 (Annexure P3).

2. In CRM-M-28713-2017, this Court had passed the following order on 16.02.2023:

“Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of impugned order dated 22.05.2017 (Annexure P-4) passed by Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana whereby application for release of the case property has been declined.

It is revealed that in a trial arising out of FIR No. 83 dated 31.08.2014 registered at Police Station Dugri, District Ludhiana under Sections 420 & 120-B of the IPC and Section 13-A of Public Gambling Act, 9 accused including petitioner Amarjit Singh were tried.

Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana vide his judgment dated 26.03.2015 convicted petitioner Amarjit Singh besides Sandeep Kumar @ Sonu and Jagdish Singh @ Bittu under Section 13-A of the Public Gambling Act. They were sentenced separately. In the appeal filed by the appellant, acquittal was recorded by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana vide judgment dated 23.12.2016 (Annexure P-2) and it was clearly directed that case property except the currency notes be confiscated to the State. It was directed that currency notes were to be dealt with as per law after the lapse of period of appeal and revision, if any. It is conceded fact that respondent-State did not file any revision against the judgment of acquittal as recorded by Learned Sessions Judge, Ludhiana.

During investigation an amount of Rs. 13,80,000/- has been recovered from the petitioner Amarjit Singh whereas Rs. 8,000/- from Sandeep Kumar and Rs. 5,000/- Jagdish Singh @ Bittu were recovered.

After the judgment of acquittal in his favour, petitioner applied for release of the amount of Rs. 13,80,000/- but Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class vide impugned order dated 22.05.2017 declined the application on the ground that applicant could not show the amount belonging to him.

In the considered opinion of this Court the impugned order is quite illegal and perverse. It was the own case of the prosecution that amount of Rs. 13,80,000/- had been recovered from the possession of the petitioner which had been taken into possession during investigation.

Therefore, the impugned order is hereby set aside. An amount of Rs. 13,80,000/- is directed to released to the petitioner with immediate effect.

Petition allowed accordingly.”

3. It is contended by learned counsel that after passing of the aforesaid order, petitioner moved an application before Ld. JMIC, Ludhiana to release the amount of Rs. 13,80,000/- in the form of new currency notes, but Ld. Magistrate passed a partial order, without giving any direction for releasing the new currency notes, to the SHO Police Station Dugri, District Ludhiana. It is further contended that petitioner came to know that his currency notes of Rs. 13,80,000/- are still in the form of old currency notes, as the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO did not deposit the old currency notes in any bank or in treasury, in view of the notification of the Government of India for demonetization.

4. Ld. Counsel has also drawn attention towards the fact that petitioner had already moved an application to Ld. JMIC, Ludhiana to direct the SHO to deposit the recovered amount in the treasury office and Ld. Magistrate had passed the order dated 22.05.2017 as per which stand was taken by the police that it was awaiting the order of the Commissioner of Police to get the currency deposited. It is despite the fact that Court had already passed an order dated 03.01.2017 directing the police to deposit the old currency notes in the treasury.

5. In short reply filed on behalf of the respondents/State, it is stated that pursuant to the order passed