IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.659 of 2008 SHANTI DEVI VERMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THRU. VIG. ----------- 7 9.4.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The instant revision application is directed against the order dated 28.5.2008, passed by the Special Judge Vigilance (Trap) Bihar, Patna, in Special Case No.20/07 arising out of Vigilance P.S. Case No.44/07, whereby the prayer of the petitioner to release her Pass Book and Saving Bank Account No.(Old) 01190006088, New No.10454343209 of State Bank of India, Anand Puri Branch Patna, has been rejected. It appears that a Vigilance Case was instituted against one Anil Kumar, son-in-law of the petitioner, who was serving in the Commercial Tax Department. In course of investigation it transpired that aforesaid Anil Kumar has earned wealth disproportionate to his income and has stored money in different forms and in different banks. The claim of vigilance is that he amassed wealth to the extent of Rs.66/- lacs. The petitioner submits that she has no concern with the affairs of her son in law, Anil Kumar.However, her Pass Book and the aforesaid Bank Saving Bank Account have been illegally seized. She has opened the said S.B. Account jointly with her daughter, namely, Kumari Seema, wife of the accused Anil Kumar, in 1995, in which she has been depositing money accruing from 2 rent. In support of her claim, she placed reliance on Annexure-2 which is pay slips issued by bank in token of deposit of the rent accruals. Further more the petitioner has been regularly paying income tax. In support of her contention she has referred to Annexure-3 which forms part of the returns as well as receipt granted by the Income Tax Department. It is not in dispute that the amount in her Account is to tune of Rs.2,05,000/-. She states that she is willing to furnish adequate surety for lifting the seize. Learned counsel submits that in case it is found that the aforesaid money is the ill gotten money of her son-in-law, the surety so furnished may be auctioned to recover the aforesaid gain. Learned counsel also undertakes that he would produce Pass – Book of the bank as and when required by court. After hearing the parties and taking into consideration the submission made, this Court does not find that any useful purpose would be secured, if Pass Book and Saving Bank Account remains seized and freezed . In the back drop of aforesaid facts, this Court directs the Bank to lift the seize on bank account and allow the petitioner to operate the account, after it has provided adequate sureties in the court of the Special Judge Vigilance (Trap) , Patna. The authorities are also directed to release the seized Pass-Book also. The petitioner would also give an undertaking that she will produce the said Pass Book as and when it is required during trial. The surety provided by the petitioner would be subject to the result of the prosecution 3 case. This revision application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. Anil Kr.Sinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)