https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169712 A finding in the criminal judgment identifying the amount procured by the offence was sufficient compliance with section 12 of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, and no separate formal order was required before the District Judge could act under section 13(3). Where the attached property was not itself the property procured by the offence, valuation could be undertaken by the District Judge at the forfeiture stage. The forfeiture mechanism was treated as a civil recovery process for realising money or property obtained through the offence, not as punitive forfeiture, so Article 20(1) did not bar the proceeding. The forfeiture order was therefore legally sustainable. en-us Mon, 16 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 May 2015 14:47:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169712 A finding in the criminal judgment identifying the amount procured by the offence was sufficient compliance with section 12 of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, and no separate formal order was required before the District Judge could act under section 13(3). Where the attached property was not itself the property procured by the offence, valuation could be undertaken by the District Judge at the forfeiture stage. The forfeiture mechanism was treated as a civil recovery process for realising money or property obtained through the offence, not as punitive forfeiture, so Article 20(1) did not bar the proceeding. The forfeiture order was therefore legally sustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 16 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169712