Release of attached property under criminal procedure may still be considered on merits despite delay where sufficient cause is shown.

Property attached under Sections 83 to 85 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is intended to secure the appearance of a proclaimed person, not to impose permanent forfeiture. Section 85(3) prescribes a two-year period, but that limit is not absolute where sufficient cause explains the delay. On the stated facts, the property remained under attachment in civil proceedings until October 2019, which materially explained the later application for release and restoration. The application therefore could not be rejected merely for being filed beyond two years and had to be examined on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the right to seek release and restoration of property attached under Section 85 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 stands extinguished merely because the application was filed after two years from the date of attachment.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of attachment under Sections 83 to 85 is intended to compel the appearance of the proclaimed person and not to punish by permanent deprivation of property. Section 85(3) fixes a two-year period, but the provision must be applied with reference to the facts and the purpose of the enactment. Where a party shows sufficient cause for not moving within the prescribed period, the Court is not barred from entertaining the application on merits. The surrounding circumstances showed that the property was also under attachment in the civil proceedings until October 2019, and this materially explained why the application under Section 85 was made only thereafter.

Conclusion: The right to seek release and restoration of the attached property was not extinguished merely because the application was filed beyond two years, and the application had to be considered on merits.

---