Facts of the case
- The Station House Officer, Itarsi moved applications before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Itarsi for initiating proceedings against the respondents under Chapter VII-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for attachment and forfeiture of the properties of the respondents.
- According to the applications, the said properties were derived from or used in commission of offences and were acquired from the criminal activities. The police further urged that the respondents were involved in the criminal activities since long and had accumulated huge wealth derived directly or indirectly by or such criminal and unlawful activities.
- According to the police some of these properties were in the names of their relatives which were clearly traceable to the respondents.
- The prayer thus was made under Section 105-D of the Code for authorization to take all necessary steps to trace out and identify such properties and further for the forfeiture and vesting.
- The Trial Court passed an order in pursuance of these applications and allowed the same, the respondents challenged the same by way of a petition under Section 482 of the Code.
- The Division Bench by the order quashed the proceedings holding that the provisions of Chapter VII-A were not applicable to such local offences complained of.
- State of M.P. challenged the order in the Supreme Court.
Judgment
The Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that, “We have perused the heading of Chapter VII-A as also the Statement of Objects and Reasons. After perusing the same we are of the firm opinion that the well written judgment of the High Court is correct and the High Court has taken a correct view. We have even taken into consideration the speech of the then Home Minister Shri S.B. Chavan which leaves no doubt that this Chapter is not meant for the local offences.When we see the applications as also the order passed by the Trial Court, it is clear that it is only and only in respect of the local offences like gambling and the offences under I.P.C. which are local. Even the properties are not shown to be connected with crimes mentioned in the Objects and Reasons of the amending Act. In fact, no connection is established also between crimes mentioned and the properties.It is, therefore, clear that the whole chapter is specific chapter relating to the specified offences therein and has nothing to do with the local offences or the properties earned out of those. We cannot ignore the likely misuse of the provisions in Chapter VIIA if the whole Chapter is made applicable to the local offences generally. Such does not appear to be the intendment of the Legislature in introducing Chapter VII A. “
The appeal was dismissed.
BY: ANKIT RAJPUT