Recovery by unauthorized officer under Section 421 CrPC is invalid when attachment must follow the statutory district authority route.

Section 421 CrPC permits recovery of tax demand as arrears of land revenue through the District Collector or District Magistrate, and coercive attachment must follow that statutory route. An attachment issued through the BBMP Commissioner was outside the authority conferred by the provision, so the recovery step lacked lawful jurisdiction. The impugned attachment was therefore invalid and liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether an order of attachment for recovery under Section 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could validly be issued through the BBMP Commissioner instead of the District Collector or other authorized district authority.

Analysis: The recovery proceedings arose from a tax demand and were pursued under the mechanism of Section 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The statutory scheme permits realization of the amount as arrears of land revenue through the District Collector/District Magistrate. An attachment made through the BBMP Commissioner was not in conformity with that scheme, as the Commissioner was not the authority empowered under the provision to effect such attachment. The impugned recovery step was therefore without lawful authority.

Conclusion: The attachment order was invalid and liable to be set aside in favour of the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The recovery order could not be sustained because the statutory mode of enforcement was not followed and the action was taken by an lacking the requisite authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes recovery through a specified district authority, coercive attachment by an unauthorized officer is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained.

---