When a bank account is frozen on the allegation that it contains proceeds of crime, the appropriate legal provision to be invoked is Section 107 of the BNSS rather than Section 102 of the Cr.P.C.

ORDER

The revision challenges the dismissal of the petitioner’s application seeking defreezing of his bank account, which was frozen during the course of investigation in Crime No.20 of 2025 registered for the offences under Section 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act, 1998 .

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner, along with other accused, was involved in illegal online lottery activities, had wrongfully gained amounts and deposited the proceeds of crime in the bank account maintained by him. The petitioner sought defreezing of the said account, which came to be dismissed by the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent ought not to have invoked Section 102 Cr.P.C. and that, even assuming that the petitioner had deposited the proceeds of crime in the account, the respondent ought to have invoked only Section 107 of the BNSS for attachment. Therefore, the bank account is liable to be defrozen and the petitioner is entitled to operate the same.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent, per contra, would submit that there is material to show that a transaction of Rs.1,54,000/- was credited into the account of the petitioner by one Mr. Krishnakumar/A1, which is suspicious and, according to the prosecution, represents the proceeds of crime. Hence, there is no merit in the revision and prayed for its dismissal.

5. It is needless to state that if the amount held by the petitioner in his bank account is alleged to be the proceeds of crime, the respondent ought to have invoked Section 107 of the BNSS . Since the said provision has not been invoked, this Court is inclined to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner. However, it is seen that a sum of Rs.1,54,000/- has been credited into the account of the petitioner by one of the accused, which, according to the prosecution, has been derived from the commission of offences. Hence, this Court is inclined to direct defreezing of the petitioner’s bank account subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet;

(ii) The petitioner shall file an affidavit of undertaking stating that, in the event of the learned Magistrate directing return of the amount now lying in the credit, he shall return the same as and when required; and

(iii) The sum of Rs.1,54,000/- shall be kept under lien, and the petitioner shall not be permitted to withdraw the said amount.

6. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is allowed.