Reciprocal international assistance scheme under criminal procedure law cannot be stretched to ordinary local offences or domestic property forfeiture.

Chapter VII-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is confined to reciprocal international assistance between India and contracting States for arrest, attachment, forfeiture, tracing and identification of proceeds of crime. Its definitions, the reference to letters of request, and the control mechanism in Section 105-L show that the scheme targets cross-border crime, including terrorist activities, rather than ordinary domestic offences. Read in light of the Statement of Objects and Reasons and legislative background, the chapter cannot be extended by a broad literal interpretation to property allegedly derived from local offences. The statutory scheme therefore applies only to cross-border crime control and reciprocal assistance.

---

---

Issues: Whether Chapter VII-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 applies to local offences committed within India and to property alleged to have been derived from such offences.

Analysis: Chapter VII-A was enacted as a special scheme for assistance between India and contracting States in relation to arrest, attachment, forfeiture, tracing and identification of proceeds of crime. The definitions of "contracting State", "proceeds of crime" and "property", together with the language of Sections 105-B and 105-C, the reference to letters of request, and the control mechanism in Section 105-L, show that the Chapter is structured around reciprocal international assistance. The Statement of Objects and Reasons and the legislative background relied upon by the Court confirmed that the amendment was intended to deal with crimes having cross-border or international dimensions, including terrorist activities, and not with ordinary local offences. A broad literal reading detached from this context would produce an absurd result by enabling forfeiture of property from routine domestic offences to the Central Government.

Conclusion: Chapter VII-A does not extend to ordinary local offences or to property derived from such offences. The High Court's view quashing the proceedings was correct.

Final Conclusion: The statutory scheme was confined to reciprocal assistance and cross-border crime control, so the State's challenge failed and the impugned proceedings remained quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: A special statutory chapter governing attachment and forfeiture must be construed in light of its text, structure and legislative purpose, and where the scheme is confined to contracting States and reciprocal assistance it cannot be extended to ordinary domestic offences by a broad literal reading.

---