Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI
Jeyaraj – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police – Respondent
NDPS - Criminal Procedure - NDPS Act, 1985 - Sections 68E, 68F - The court discussed the provisions related to the seizing or freezing of property illegally acquired under the NDPS Act and addressed issues of due process regarding the freezing of the petitioner's bank account without sufficient grounds.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, in a criminal case, sought to unfreeze his bank account, asserting that funds therein were legitimate and unrelated to the alleged drug offense, whereas the police claimed the freeze was necessary as a precaution due to ongoing investigations.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the lack of substantive evidence connecting the frozen funds to the criminal activity and highlighted procedural shortcomings in the police's actions, thereby questioning the legitimacy of the account freeze.
Issues: Whether the bank account freezing was justified, given that funds claimed by the petitioner preceded the criminal case and were not connected to the allegations under the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that freezing of assets requires proper justification and adherence to procedures established under the NDPS Act to prevent arbitrary actions that infringe upon property rights.
Final Decision: The court directed the investigating authority to review the case and either proceed under the NDPS Act or de-freeze the bank account within eight weeks.
ORDER
The petitioner is A1 in Crime No.77 of 2023 on the file of the Pudukottai Police Station and he has filed this application seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to de-freeze his bank account No. 823410510003006 maintained in Bank of India, Alangudi Branch, Pudukottai.
2.The case of the petitioner is that on 07.04.2023 the
2nd respondent police has registered a case as against this petitioner and another for the offence under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and has also made a communication to the 3rd respondent to freeze his bank account, as it is the amount involved in the offence.
3.According to the petitioner, there was a transaction of Rs.3 lakh in his bank account No.823410510003006 maintained in Bank of India, Alangudi Branch, Pudukottai and this amount has been provided by one Ajith, Kumar and Venkatesh as a financial assistance for participating in a tender process. However, the respondent police without any reason has made a communication to the 3rd respondent to freeze his account treating this Rs.3 lakh as the amount accrued from sale of ganja .
4.The case as against this petitioner in Crime No.77 of 2023 is that he was in possession of 950 grams of ganja in his vehicle bearing registration number TN 55 AK 1013. The respondent Police has arrested this petitioner and another and recovered ganja from this petitioner with the vehicle, which involved in the offence. During the course of investigation it appears that the investigating officer has found some transactions in the petitioner's bank account and therefore, the 3rd respondent was directed to freeze this petitioner's bank account.
5.When this application was taken up for hearing on
01.12.2023 this Court directed the respondents to file a counter affidavit and posted the case to 03.01.2024. Thereafter this application was listed on 16.07.2024. This Court by order dated 16.07.2024 directed the Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai to file a report as to the reasons for not providing any instructions and not filing the final counter for the past several months. Thereafter on 22.07.2024 a report was filed by the 2nd respondent that only as a precautionary measure, a request was made to freeze the bank account of the petitioner and the amount lying in the petitioner account is not connected with this criminal case. However, the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit as directed by this Court vide order dated 01.12.2023.
6.This Court considered the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
7.Chapter V-A of the NDPS Act, 1985 enables the investigating agency to seize or freeze the property of an accused which was illegally acquired by him. Section 68E of the NDPS Act empowers the investigation officer to identify the illegally acquired property and Section 68F of the Act empowers the investigating officer to make an order for seizing of such property and where it is not practicable to seize such property, he may make an order for such property shall not be transferred or otherwise dealt with except with the prior permission of the officer making such an order. Accordingly in this case the request was made to the bank concerned on 13.04.2023 to freeze the amount in his account.
8.The petitioner in this petition has stated that there was a transaction of Rs.3 lakh which is prior to the registration of the criminal case in Crime No.77 of 2023. This sum of Rs.3 lakh according to the petitioner has been borrowed by him from one Ajith, Kumar and Venkatesan for the purpose of participating in a tender. The petitioner on the one hand claims that he is an agricultural coolie and on the other hand claims that he has borrowed this amount for participating in the tender at Alangudi Town Panchayat.
9.This Court by order dated 01.12.2023 directed the respondent police to file a counter. The respondent police have not filed the counter as directed by this Court. Therefore, this Court by order
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
