Back
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
*Sanjay K. Agrawal, Rakesh Mohan Pandey, JJ.
Uday Singha v. State of Chhattisgarh
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. freezing of accounts requires an fir. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. legal remedies are available for defreezing. (Para 3 , 11) |
| 3. s.102 governs property seizure in investigations. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. definitions of property under s.102 as established. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 5. magistrate's role in responding to seized property. (Para 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. the petitioner has the right to seek remedies. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
1. This petition is directed against the order Annexure P - 1 by which the petitioner's savings bank account has been freezed on a complaint made by one Jai Prakash Agrawal, Proprietor of Mining Industries Private Limited, Bilaspur, on 29-1-2022, whereas the first information report (FIR) against him was registered on 10-2-2022 which is unsustainable and bad in view of the provisions contained in S.102 of the CrPC.
2. Mr. Sushobhit Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that without registration of FIR, savings bank account of the petitioner has been freezed which runs contrary to the decision rendered by the Madras High Court in the matter of Mrs. B. Kavitha v. The Inspector of Police and another (Crl.O.P.No.14824 of 2019, decided on 11-6-2019) : (AIROnLin
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
