Section 132A requisition for seized currency prevails over criminal custody rules when assets may represent undisclosed income.

Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 enables the requisitioning of assets in police custody where there is reason to believe they represent undisclosed income or property, and that statutory mechanism operates independently of the CrPC provisions on custody of property. Currency notes seized in connection with a criminal case cannot be withheld by the police once a valid requisition is made, because interim criminal custody does not override the income-tax process for delivery, assessment, or reassessment under the Act. The discussion concludes that the objection based on sections 451 and 457 of the CrPC does not defeat requisition under section 132A.

---

---

Issues: Whether currency notes seized by the police could be withheld for the criminal case or were liable to be handed over to the Income-tax Department on requisition under section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 notwithstanding the powers under sections 451 and 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: Section 132A empowers the specified income-tax authority, where there is reason to believe that assets in police custody represent undisclosed income or property, to requisition delivery of such assets for income-tax proceedings. The provision operates independently of the CrPC machinery governing custody of property pending trial. The fact that the cash was alleged to be part of a criminal case did not justify retaining it with the police, because the statute specifically enables the requisitioning authority to obtain custody and thereafter proceed with assessment or reassessment, including within the time framework under sections 132B, 153 and 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The earlier decisions relied upon also recognised that the police have no power to withhold currency notes once valid requisition is made and that interim criminal custody cannot defeat the statutory tax process.

Conclusion: The requisition under section 132A was valid and the seized currency notes were required to be handed over to the Income-tax Department; the objection based on the criminal case and CrPC custody provisions failed.

Final Conclusion: The order refusing delivery of the seized cash was set aside, and custody of the currency notes was directed to be transferred to the Income-tax Department for proceedings under the tax law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where assets in police custody are found, on reason to believe, to represent undisclosed income or property, section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 prevails for requisition and delivery of the assets, and the police or criminal court custody provisions cannot be used to defeat the statutory income-tax process.

---