July 17, 2018
Case name: Nasir Hussain v. State of Chattisgarh & Ors.
In the instant case, the High Court has deliberated on the power of Police under Section 102 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) according to which the Police Officer may seize any property which is suspected to have been stolen or found under suspicious circumstances.
In the instant case, the Police in exercise of power under Section 102 of CrPC, had seized three trucks of iron angles and other objects weighing about 40 tonnes and has given the same to the possession of the employees of the petitioner, but thereafter, proceeded to seal the shop/immovable property held/owned by the petitioner.
Thus, the issue that fell for consideration before the High Court was whether in exercise of power under Section 102 of CrPC, the police officer is empowered to seal the shop of the petitioner?
Under Section 102 of CrPC, the police officer may seize any property which may be alleged or suspected to have been stolen, or which may be found under circumstances, which create suspicion of the Commission of any offence.
- The High Court of Chattisgarh while delivering its judgment in the case heavily relied on Bombay High Court’s verdict in the case of Sudhir Vasant Karnataki…. v. The State of Maharashtra, wherein a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court held that a police officer has no power to seal the immovable property and the word seize under Section 102 of the CrPC would mean only actual taking possession of movable property.
- In view of the aforesaid, the High Court of Chattisgarh opined that under Section 102 of CrPC the police have no power to seal the immovable property and the word seize used under Section 102 of CrPC would mean only actual taking possession of the movable property.
The entire case can be accessed here.