DEVESHWARI DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for the petitioner submitted that Abhishek Bisht is facing prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act pursuant to the complaint filed by the complainant; since, accused Abhishek Bisht did not appear before the Trial Magistrate, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued against Abhishek Bisht; on the request of prosecution, Trial Court passed order for the attachment of the house belonging to the present petitioner. It has further been contended that house, in question, does not belong to accused Abhishek Bisht and is the sole property of the present petitioner, therefore, same cannot be attached. He further contended that objections were filed by the present petitioner before the learned Magistrate to the same effect whereupon learned Magistrate has passed order 'keep on file' and did not proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner. He further contended that property not belonging to the accused cannot be attached under Section 83 of the Cr.P.C.; if such objection is raised, learned Trial

(2.) Magistrate is duty bound to decide the question before passing the order under Section 83 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Sections 83 and 84 of the Cr.P.C. are being reproduced herein to appreciate the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner:-