BALBIR SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER in exercise of the powers under Section 132a of the I. T. Act, 1961 ("the Act", for short), the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner, can authorise any of the officers mentioned in this section to require a treasury officer to deliver the case property deposited with him for safe custody under order of a competent criminal court, is the significant question which has arisen for determination in this writ petition.

(2.) A brief survey of the material facts will illumine the contours of a pristinely legal controversy.

(3.) ASSISTANT Sub-Inspector, Sheonath, registered First Information Report No. 242, dated September 5, 1977, Under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, at Police Station, Bahadurgarh, on the allegations that Balbir Singh (the present petitioner) and two others had amassed wealth by organising thefts at far away places and they were habitual receivers of stolen properties. A raid was conducted by a police party on the house of Balbir Singh, petitioner, on September 6, 1977. On search of his house, currency notes of the value of Rs. 2,99,000 were recovered. The police took into possession this money Under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "the Code") suspecting the same to be stolen property. This property was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak. The Chief Judicial Magistrate on September 7, 1977, ordered that the case property (currency notes of Rs. 2,99,000) be deposited in the treasury at Rohtak for safe custody.