Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Main Points and Insights:
Section 107 BNSS primarily deals with the attachment, forfeiture, or restoration of property believed to be derived from criminal activity. It requires police or investigating authorities to approach a Magistrate for orders to attach property ["Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525"] ["Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714"] ["Karthikeyan Manikandan vs The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited - Madras"].
Procedure for attachment: Police officers investigating crimes involving proceeds of crime must seek Magistrate approval under Section 107 before attaching or freezing property or bank accounts believed to be linked to criminal activity ["Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714"] ["Karthikeyan Manikandan vs The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited - Madras"] ["MAGAM VINAY VARDHAN vs The State rep by Inspector of Police - Madras"].
Cheating cases and attachment: In cases where individuals cheat by collecting money (e.g., promising jobs abroad or false promises) and fail to fulfill these promises, authorities can invoke Section 107 BNSS to attach properties obtained through such fraudulent means, provided the property is believed to be proceeds of crime ["Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525"] ["Karthikeyan Manikandan vs The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited - Madras"] ["MAGAM VINAY VARDHAN vs The State rep by Inspector of Police - Madras"].
Attachment only upon Magistrate’s order: The law emphasizes that attachment of property, including bank accounts or assets, can only be effected with the Magistrate’s prior order, ensuring a legal process and preventing arbitrary action ["Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525"] ["Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714"] ["Karthikeyan Manikandan vs The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited - Madras"].
Application to Minister’s misconduct: The query about a Minister allegedly cheating by obtaining money for posting a job could potentially fall under this framework if it is established that the money was obtained through fraudulent means or criminal activity. Authorities would need to approach the Magistrate under Section 107 BNSS to seek attachment of such proceeds, following the prescribed legal procedure ["Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525"] ["Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
The legal provisions under Section 107 BNSS are designed to regulate the attachment and forfeiture of assets derived from criminal activities, including fraud and cheating. The process mandates Magistrate approval, ensuring due process.
In cases where a Minister or any individual is suspected of illicitly obtaining funds (e.g., money for posting jobs), authorities must demonstrate that the funds are proceeds of crime and follow the procedural steps outlined in Section 107 BNSS to attach or freeze assets.
Therefore, if a Minister is found to have engaged in cheating by securing money through false promises or fraudulent means, the applicable law is Section 107 BNSS, which allows for attachment of property only with Magistrate’s order, ensuring legality and procedural correctness ["Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525"] ["Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714"].
References:
In recent years, high-profile corruption cases involving public officials, such as ministers promising jobs in exchange for money, have grabbed headlines. Imagine a scenario where a minister cheats job seekers by collecting fees for nonexistent postings. Can authorities attach the ill-gotten property under the new Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)? This question is at the heart of evolving criminal procedure laws in India, addressing gaps in the old Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
This blog explores whether Section 107 BNSS applies to such cheating offenses, detailing the process, requirements, and judicial insights. We'll break down the legal framework, drawing from key provisions and court observations to provide clarity for those navigating similar issues.
A common query arises: Minister who cheat by getting the amount for posting the job. Sec 107 BNSS applicable for attachment of property? This typically involves offenses like cheating under IPC Section 420 or bribery, where funds collected fraudulently lead to assets that need safeguarding during investigation.
Yes, Section 107 of the BNSS generally applies to the attachment of property derived or obtained directly or indirectly from criminal activity, including a minister cheating by taking money for job postings. Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525 A police officer investigating such a case may apply to the Court or Magistrate for attachment if there is reason to believe the property stems from the crime, subject to prior approval from the Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police. This provision fills a prior lacuna in the CrPC regarding seizure or attachment of proceeds of crime. Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714
The full text of Section 107(1) BNSS states: Where a police officer making an investigation has reason to believe that any property is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of a criminal activity or from the commission of any offence, he may, with the approval of the Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police, make an application to the Court or the Magistrate exercising jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence or commit for trial or try the case, for the attachment of such property.Headstar Global Pvt. Limited, Represented By Its Director/ Authorized Signatory, Sreekumar C.S., S/o. Sreedharan Nai vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2525
Section 107 BNSS targets property from offenses like ministerial cheating for jobs (e.g., IPC 420 or bribery). Unlike CrPC, which lacked a general mechanism beyond suspected stolen property under Section 102, BNSS introduces this curative tool. Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714 In cheating cases involving public servants, traceable money or assets (e.g., purchased properties) qualify for attachment.
The Kerala High Court has clarified: Going by Section 107 of BNSS, a police officer investigating a crime has to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking attachment of any property believed to be derived directly or indirectly from criminal activity or the commission of an offence.Kartik Yogeshwar Chatur vs Union of India - 2025 Supreme(Bom) 1497ARSHAD AUTOBAHN INDIA PVT. LTD AND ANR. vs RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 5208
Post-attachment, forfeiture or restoration follows trial. This distinguishes it from Section 106 BNSS (seizure powers), where debit freezing of accounts is impermissible without Magistrate order under Section 107. Kartik Yogeshwar Chatur vs Union of India - 2025 Supreme(Bom) 1497
Section 126 BNSS (preventing breach of peace, akin to CrPC 107) is irrelevant here, as it deals with security bonds, not crime proceeds. Syed Ali Akbar Khan, S/o. Pookoya Thangal VS State Of Kerala - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 983Dhinesh Vs Ii Class Executive Magistrate And Tahsildar - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 2174 Sections 106 and 107 operate differently: Section 106 for seizure, Section 107 for adjudicatory attachment of proceeds. IIFL FINANCE LTD. vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 3390
Attachments under Section 107 (like CrPC 102) withstand minor procedural issues but face scrutiny on:- Jurisdiction.- Crime-property linkage.- Property nature.
Owners, including public figures, can challenge via petitions. Courts must prevent abuse, especially in political cases. Headstar Global Private Limited vs State of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1714
Limitations:- No prior approval or reasons = invalid.- Investigation-stage only; trial handles forfeiture.- Not automatic—judicial oversight required.
In cyber fraud or loan scam contexts, courts quash improper freezes under Section 106, directing use of Section 107. Kartik Yogeshwar Chatur vs Union of India - 2025 Supreme(Bom) 1497
Related cases highlight diligence: Attachments before judgment fail without ownership verification, protecting third-party buyers. Senthil VS Rajamani - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 778 In execution proceedings, disproportionate attachments (e.g., entire land for small debt) are set aside. Arjun Fakira Bari VS Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies - 2021 Supreme(Bom) 1095
Consider job scam allegations invoking ministerial names: Courts deny bail if custodial interrogation is needed to trace cheated funds. Tanisha Rani Sharma VS State (The NCT of Delhi) - 2016 Supreme(Del) 2750 Public servants aiding job cheats face prosecution under PC Act Section 7, even across departments. Dhiraj Burman VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2014 Supreme(Gau) 497
In recovery suits, conditional attachments under specific acts (e.g., APCS Section 73) require intent to obstruct, not applicable casually. Pamidimukkala Umadevi, W/o Nalluri Balakrishna VS State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Cooperative Department - 2022 Supreme(AP) 819
For investigators in ministerial cheating cases:- Document property-offense links meticulously.- Secure SP approval.- Apply promptly to jurisdictional Magistrate.
Affected parties should challenge on merits or procedure. Courts scrutinize to balance investigation needs with rights.
Disclaimer: This is general information based on legal provisions and judgments. It does not constitute specific legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Stay informed on BNSS updates to navigate India's modern criminal justice landscape effectively.
BNSS ” for short). For ease of reference, the newly introduced Section 107 of BNSS is extracted below; “107. ... Ltd. promised to refund the advance amount, but failed to fulfill the promise. Thereupon it became evident that the intention from the very inception was to cheat the 3rd respondent by collecting the advance amount based on the false promise. ... If so, the amount can be attached or the account frozen only by following the procedure prescr....
If so, the amount can be attached or the account frozen only by following the procedure prescribed in Section 107 of BNSS. ... For ease of reference, the newly introduced Section 107 of BNSS is extracted below; “107. ... Going by Section 107 of BNSS, a police officer investigating a crime has to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking attachment of any property believed to be derived directly or indirectly f....
Going by Section 107 of BNSS, a police officer investigating a crime has to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking attachment of any property believed to be derived directly or indirectly from criminal activity or the commission of an offence. ... for assistance in attachment and forfeiture of property in a contracting state. ... 10] Thus, the Kerala High Court, in clear terms, held that a police officer investigating a crime has to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Sec....
As the amount involved in fake loans is huge, respondent No.5 filed claim petition and the conditional attachment order passed by respondent No.3 is proper and as per Section 73 of the APCS Act. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition. ... order in claim No.386/2022-C, dated 03.06.2022 passed by respondent No.3 for conditional attachment of property belongs to the petitioner under Section 73 of A.P.C.S. ... arbitrator or liquidator, as the case may be, he may, unless adequate security is furnished, direct a....
If the police Officer is on the view that the property said to have been acquired by cheating or misappropriation has to be safeguarded, he has to invoke Section 107 of BNSS for attachment and forfeiture or for other such remedies. ... complainant, the respondents can only seek attachment the property under Section 107 of BNS and that therefore, the impugned communication is liable to be set aside. ... The respondents shall be at liberty to seek remedy orders under ....
Going by Section 107 of BNSS, a police officer investigating a crime has to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking attachment of any property believed to be derived directly or indirectly from criminal activity or the commission of an offence. ... Thus, the Kerala High Court, in clear terms, held that a police officer investigating a crime has to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 107 of the BNSS to seek attachment of any property#HL_EN....
If the jewels are needed to protect the interest of the victims, it is needless to say that Section 106 BNSS (corresponding to Section 102 Cr.P.C.) cannot be invoked and only Section 107 BNSS can be invoked. ... of the property in the manner known to law. ... 6.It is not the case of the petitioner that the property, namely, the gold ornaments is a stolen property or that it created suspicion of commission of any offence. ... 3.The gist of the allegation is that the petitioner along ....
Further, Section 107 dealing with attachment, forfeiture or restoration of property provides that where a police officer making an investigation has reason to believe that any property is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly as a result of a criminal activity or from the commission of offence, ... However, sub-section (5) of Section 107 empowers the Court or the Magistrate to direct attachment or seizure by an interim order, if it is of the opinion that issuance of notice would ....
No.23 of 2016 was filed for realization of the decreetal amount by attachment and recovery from the salary of the JDr to an amount of Rs.2,40,809.00. Due to the suspension of the JDr from his job, the recovery of salary after six months was stopped. ... Sec. 60 CPC-Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree: (1) The following property is liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, namely, lands, house....
Section 107 deals with Attachment, Forfeiture or Restoration of property reads as under: 107. ... Section 107 of the BNSS, which provides for attachment, forfeiture, and restoration, operates at a later and more adjudicatory stage. It is invoked when the court forms an opinion that property constitutes proceeds of crime. ... Sections 106 and 107 of the BNSS Act operate in different fields. Section 106 deals with se....
The Court also attached the property on 07.04.2016. The first respondent was well aware of the sale deed executed by the second respondent in favour of the petitioner in respect of the petition property. The first respondent, in order to cheat the petitioner, filed the application for attachment of the property, by suppressing the material facts. At the time of filing the suit and the attachment application, the property did not belong to the second respondent.
In the context of the aforesaid challenges it may be expedient to extract the relevant sub-rules of Rule 107. Rule 107 contains a fasciculous of provisions for attachment and sale of property.
The alleged payment of the monies, apparently, was made in a government bungalow at 9, Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi i.e. the official residence of a Central Minister. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant invoked the name of the Central Minister to claim that the money had been collected for him and paid to him for getting the job done, and that the same would also be repaid by him.
In the cross- examination PW 11 has admitted that it is his habit to help voting boys in getting job. PW 11 has further clarified in the cross-examination that the accused visited his house along with his nephew of the witness. From his conduct PW 11 was the soft target for accused to involve him for his nefarious plan to cheat some of the candidates for getting job in the High Court. Since Dhiraj Barman was not known to him he introduced himself.
(wherever Applicable) and posting (whether Minister 14. Proposals for the appointment confirmation The Chief
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
