Advocates:
['Bhandari Anand P', 'COPY SERVED ON PP', '', 'Adv ARORA SHYAM C']

1

14- Cri. W. P. No. 983-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

14 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.983 OF 2021

M/s Shri Mahavir Jewelers,

Through its Partner

Mr. Harshal Mahavir Deoda,

Age : 38 Years, Occ. Business,

R/o. Plot No.3, Chintamani Colony,

Samarth Nagar, Aurangabad.

..PETITIONER

V E R S U S

1.

The State of Maharashtra,

Through Police Inspector,

Gangapur Police Station,

2.

Police Inspector,

Economic Ofence Wing,

Aurangabad ( Rural)

3.

Krishna Sahebrao Patil Dongaonkar,

Age : 46 Years, Occ. Agriculture,

R/o. ‘’ Pratibha’’ Near Sankriti Mandal,

Khadkeshwar, Aurangabad.

..RESPONDENTS

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. A.P. Bhandari

APP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Mr. S. P. Sonpawale

Advocate for respondent No.3 : Mr. S.C. Arora

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE : 06.12.2021

PER COURT :-

This petition takes an exception to the order dated

5.8.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Vaijapur, District Aurangabad in Criminal Revision Application

No. 11 of 2021.

2

14- Cri. W. P. No. 983-2021.odt

2.

The petitioner herein had fled an application before

the learned Magistrate for defreezing his cash credit bank

account with State Bank of India, which came to be freezed in

view of the letter of the investigating ofcer in crime No. 402 of

2020 for the ofences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468,

469, 471, 474,120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC registered

at Gangapur Police Station. The learned Magistrate rejected the

said application by the order dated 5.8.2021. Against the said

order revision was fled by the present petitioner. The revisional

Court has found that the investigating ofcer after calling upon

the bank to freeze the bank account of the petitioner has not

followed the procedure contemplated under Section 102 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned revisional Court

granted 15 days time for compliance failing which the bank

account of the petitioner shall stand defreez.

3.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the revisional Court was not justifed in granting opportunity to

the investigating ofcer, and ought to have ordered defreezing

of the bank account as it was freezed in violation of Section 102

of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, fact remains that

the investigating ofcer has now complied with the said section

102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3

14- Cri. W. P. No. 983-2021.odt

4.

According to the prosecution, the amount of Rs. One

Crore lying in the bank account of the petitioner is crime

proceeds.

5.

Admittedly, the investigation is still going on.

Considering these facts and circumstances I am not inclined to

interfere with the orders impugned at this stage. However,

liberty is granted to the petitioner to move the application after

fling of the charge sheet. In the result following order is

passed.

O R D E R

(i)

The petition is disposed of in following terms :

(ii)

The liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an

application for defreezing of his bank account after fling of the

charge sheet.

(iii)

If such application is fled, the learned Magistrate shall

decide the said application on it’s own merits without being

influenced by order passed by the learned Sessions Court.

( N. R. BORKAR )

JUDGE

ysk