Legal Provisions of Section 102 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), India.
Power of police officer to seize certain property:
The word ‘seize’ used in this section has to be construed to mean taking physical possession. Therefore, directing a bank with which the accused has an account and a locker, not to pay any amount from his account and not to allow the accused to operate his locker, is not ‘seizure’ as contemplated by Section 102 of the Code.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The police do not have any express authority under Section 102 to order stoppage of operation of the Bank account of the accused. But the Delhi High Court has held a view that w here the petitioners were suspected to have defrauded the Government of India by claiming subsidy, the Central Bureau of Investigation issued directions to various Bankers and financial institutions in which the petitioners had their accounts in their own names or in the name of their relatives, to freeze the accounts, the action of the C.B.I, was held to be legal and perfectly justified.
However, reacting sharply to the conflicting decisions of various High Courts, the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Tapas Neogy, has held the view that “the bank account of the accused or any of his relatives is ‘property’ within the meaning of Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the police officer in course of investigation can seize or prohibit the operation of the said account if assets have direct links with the commission of offence which the police officer is investigating”.
The seizure of Indian currency by a police officer on suspicion of the commission of some offence was held to be valid and legal.
Image Source : guardianlv.com