IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2010 / 1ST MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3952 of 2009() ------------------------- CMP.1850/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ERNAKULAM .................... (CRIME NO.88/CR/EKM/08 OF CBCID, ERNAKULAM) PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- R.GIREESH, S/O.LATE RAJAN, PULIYANEEZHATHU HOUSE, BEHIND AYYAPPANKAVU TEMPLE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.C.S.MANILAL RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID-SIG-3 ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ---------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3952 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2010 ORDER The account maintained by the petitioner in Vijaya Bank, Sahodharan Ayyappan Road, Vyttila, Kochi as 207000301000362 was freezed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police CBCID in Crime No.88/CR/EKM/08, which was originally crime No.666/2008 of Ernakulam Town North Police Station registered for the offence under Sections 406, 465, 468, 471, 477 and 120B read with Section 34 IPC. The freezing was on the allegation that the amount in that account is the money of the first accused Santhosh Madhavan. Petitioner filed Annexure-1(CMP 1850/2009) to lift the freezing of the account contending that the money in the said account exclusively belong to the petitioner and has nothing to do with the first accused in the case. The petitioner would contend that Rs.9,77,340/- was deposited in that account on 16.6.2008 and it was obtained by the petitioner from M/s.OEN Company as the amount due to the petitioner and again on 23.4.2008 Rs.6,59,704/- was deposited by the petitioner as per the cheque obtained from M/s.OEN Company, which is also for the amount due and in such 2 circumstances the account cannot be freezed. By Annexure-II order the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition holding that police is investigating the case and the question whether the amount in deposit is that of the first accused is yet to be ascertained and therefore, the freezing cannot be lifted. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash that order. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned public prosecutor were heard. Along with Annexure-1, petitioner produced a copy of the ledger extract of account No.207000301000362 of Vijaya Bank, Vyttila Branch. The account holder is M/s.R.G. Constructions. Petitioner is also produced the communication received from the Vijaya Bank to show that petitioner is the proprietor of R.G. Constructions. By the said communication petitioner was informed that the said account was freezed by the police. The ledger extract shows that the account was opened by a deposit of Rs.1,000/- in cash on 22.4.2008 and there were only three other deposits, one on 23.4.2008 of Rs.6,59,704/- and other on 16.6.2008 for Rs.9,77,348/- and the third on 16.6.2008 for Rs.5,000/-. The only other transactions of the account are 3 withdrawls as on 18.6.2008. The balance available is Rs.5,00,563/-. It is that amount which was seized in the case. Petitioner has also produced cheque for Rs.9,77,340/- received from M/s.R.G.Constructions on 11.6.2008 and produced Annexure-II letter issued by the Senior Manager of OEN India Ltd. to show that the said cheque as well as cheque No.5987 dated 21.4.2008 drawn in their account in Centurian Bank for Rs.6,59,704/- were issued to M/s.R.G.Constructions for their work done (construction of security building) as per order dated 10.4.2008. Annexure-3 the quotation received with the plan and Annexure-4 the work order were also produced to establish that deposit of Rs.9,77,340/- and Rs.6,59,704/- are the amount obtained by R.G.Constructions from the petitioner and it has nothing to do with the first accused. In such circumstances, when there is no case for the prosecution that R.G.Constructions is a front organization of the first accused or that the transactions of construction of security building of M/s.OEN India Ltd. was entered into by the first accused, the amount obtained by R.G.Constructions and deposited in the freezed account, cannot be the amount due to the first accused. The documents produced that it is the amount 4 due to M/s.R.G.Constructions. When prosecution has no case that first accused has anything to do with R.G.Constructions, the balance amount in that account which is not that of the first accused, cannot be seized or freezed, as it is not the amount due or belong to the first accused. Annexure-II order is quashed. Freezing of account No.207000301000362 of M/s.R.G.Constructions, Vijaya Bank, Vyttila Branch is lifted. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge cms