KRISHNA CHAINNAYA SHETTY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Shri Tulpule, P.P. waives service for Respondent. By consent heard forthwith.

(2.) The Petitioners are challenging the order dated 16.7.1997 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade, Bombay, in Notice No.924/N/96 arising out of C.R. No.99/96, registered by the G.B.C.B., C.I.D., Mumbai. The learned Magistrate has ordered for seizure of the immovable property, namely shop no.G-23 in Manish Market, Dadar, Mumbai, which are sealed by the Police under the provisions of Section 102 of Cr.P.C.

(3.) In view of the recent judgment of this Court delivered on 19.8.1997 the Division Bench in Criminal W.P. No.303 of 1997 and other bunch of petitions, it has been held that under sections 102 Cr.P.C. the police have no power to seize immovable property. It is also held that the property which can be seized under section 102 Cr.P.C. is one which is capable of being produced before the Magistrate and since the immovable property does not answer this description, it is not liable to be seized, under the provisions of section 102 Cr.P.C. This judgment was not before the learned Magistrate when he decided the application and passed the impugned order. In this view of the matter, the order passed by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade, Bombay dated 16.7.1997 in respect of seizure and sealing the immovable property, impugned in this petition is set aside and the rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the petition.