BRIJWASI SARRAF Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.10, Learned A.G.A. for the State Respondents and Sri Sudhir Kumar, Advocate, who has appeared and filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 11 in the Registry yesterday.

(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main reliefs:-

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel the petitioner that seizure made by the Investigating Officer in these cases have not been reported to the Magistrate having jurisdiction, therefore, due to non-compliance of provisions contained under Sec. 102 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.) such seizure is not sustainable in the eye of law. His further submission is that freezing of account of the petitioner amounts to deprivation of his right to property as the money in his account belongs to the petitioner.