Seized cash can be returned to the petitioner if there are no allegations of illegality in its possession.

ORDER

The petitioner is a construction company engaged in civil contract works, including six laning of various stretches of National Highway 66. The challenge in this Crl.M.C. is against Annexure A3 order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg, Kasaragod, dismissing the application seeking interim custody of cash amounting to Rs.60,00,000/- seized from the petitioner's possession.

The essential facts are as under;

On 03.08.2022, the police stopped a Bolero Jeep bearing registration No. KL-86-6067 and on inspection found Rs.60,00,000/- in cash. Thereupon, the currency was seized under Section 102 of Cr.P.C and produced in court. The petitioner later filed an application under Section 451 Cr.P.C. seeking interim release of the cash. The learned Magistrate dismissed that application vide Annexure A3 order.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cash was meant for payment to 2004 employees of the company in connection with the Onam fesitval of 2022. The amount was withdrawn from accounts maintained by the company in different banks. In the application, an objection was raised by the police stating that the Enforcement Directorate may be interested in keeping custody of the currency notes. The Enforcement Directorate by Annexure A2 letter clarified that there is no prima facie evidence with respect to contravention of any of the provisions of the FEMA Act, 1999 and the Directorate has no role in the matter. The Income Tax Department is also not interested, since the seizure is of accounted money. In support of the submission, learned counsel referred to Annexure A6 Income Tax Return acknowledgment of the petitioner for the year

2023-24.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that having found the passenger in the vehicle carrying large amount of cash, the police seized the same in exercise of power under Section 102 of Cr.P.C. and produced it before the jurisdictional court.

4. The document produced along with this Crl.M.C.

indicates that cash withdrawn from the bank was being carried for the purpose of payment to the employees. No authority has raised an allegation that the cash seized is part of unaccounted money. Neither the Enforcement Directorate nor the Income Tax Department has envisioned any interest in getting custody of the cash. As such, it is only appropriate to grant interim custody of the currency notes to the petitioner.

In the result, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A3 order is quashed and the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg, Kasaragod is directed to release the seized currency notes worth Rs.60,00,000/- to the petitioner, by imposing appropriate conditions.