TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1544
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for respondent no.4 (through VC) In WP 664/2025 : Mr. Mahendra Limaye, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.A. Chaudhari, Counsel for respondent no.1. Mr. S.G. Karmarkar, Counsel for respondent no.2. Mr. R.S. Suryawanshi, Counsel for respondent no.3. In WP 660/2024 : Mr. Mahendra Limaye, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.A. Chaudhari, Counsel for respondent no.1. In WP 315/2025 : Mr. Mahendra Limaye, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.A. Chaudhari, Counsel for respondent no.1. Mr. P.G. Mewar, Counsel for respondent no.3. In WP 424/2025 : Mr. Mahendra Limaye, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.A. Chaudhari, Counsel for respondent no.1. Mr. V.A. Patait, Counsel for respondent no.3. Mr. A. Sambaray, Counsel for respondent no.4. In W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e proceedings. If such proceedings are filed, the Court shall decide the same on its own merit. We may mention here that in some cases, the amount has been transferred in terms of the Magistrate's order, which cannot be faulted. 5] So far as Section 106 of the BNSS is concerned, the law is well settled. The High Court of Kerala in the case of Headstar Global Pvt. Limited Vs. State of Kerala & Ors. [CRL. MC NO. 3740/2025 decided on 2/6/2025], while dealing with debit freezing of account in an identical situation, took note of a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Tapas D. Neogy [(1999) 7 SCC 685], wherein, the Supreme Court held that such powers are available to the Investigating Agency under Sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 107 in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS" for short). ...." 8] Thus, the Kerala High Court, taking note of the subsequent judgments of the Supreme Court, held that the Code did not contain any provision for seizure or attachment of the proceeds of crime, except under Chapter VII-A dealing with reciprocal arrangements with other countries. The Court then took note of the lacuna that occurred in Section 102 of the Code, and observed that the same has been cured by keeping Section 106 in BNSS, which is akin Section 102 of the Code, and by adding Section 107 in BNSS. 9] Taking cognizance of these provisions, the Kerala High Court held thus : "12. Going by Section 107 of BNSS, a police officer investigating....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ating a crime has to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 107 of the BNSS to seek attachment of any property believed to be derived directly or indirectly from a criminal activity or commission of an offence. Subsequent course will have to be adopted in terms of order passed by the Magistrate. The Court further clarified that while Section 106 speaks of seizure, Section 107 deals with attachment, forfeiture and restoration. Seizure under Section 106 can be carried out by a police officer, and ex post facto report submitted to the Magistrate. On the other hand, attachment under Section 107 can be effected only upon order of the Magistrate. The logic behind this distinction being that the purpose of seizure is more to secure evide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hhold the funds on the basis of the complaint's acknowledgement number that gets reported on the helpline number or NCRP ? Yes, Bank/intermediaries can put the disputed amount on lien on the basis of the complaint's acknowledgement number so that amount can be refunded later, after investigation of the complaint by concerned State/Uts LEAs." 16] As could be seen, Bank/intermediaries can put the disputed amount on lien, but cannot debit freeze the account. 17] Despite such status, some Banks upon receiving certain communications from Investigating Agency, which does not even call for debit freezing accounts, are proceeding to debit freeze the accounts of the account holders resulting into losses to their day-today affairs. ....