1 wp-3351-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3351 OF 2010 Shyamsundar Keshkamat ...Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr ...Respondents. ...... Mr Mahesh Jethmalani, Sr. Advocate with Rahul Moghe, and Sana Usman, Advocates, for Petitioner. Mr H.J. Dedhia, A.P.P.for the State. Mr A.S. Gadkari, Spl. P.P. for Respondent No. 2 C.B.I. Mr B.M.Chonkar, Inspector of Police, C.B.I.ACB, Mumbai present. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- 11th February, 2011. P.C. 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with an unusual prayer. The petitioner was named as accused in Case F.I.R. RC/ BA1/2009/A/0012 – Mumbai, dated 24th February, 2009 registered by Mr A.D.Modak, Supdt of Police, CBI. ACB Mumbai. 2. The petitioner filed writ petition in this Court, being Criminal Writ petition No.2913/2009, praying for quashing of the said F.I.R. In 2 wp-3351-10 the said petition, stand taken by the Department was that the Administrative Authorities of the CBI have advised that it is not a fit case for launching prosecution against the petitioner. That statement was placed on record before the Court, on the basis of which earlier writ petition filed by the Petitioner came to be allowed on 13th August,2010. 3. The present petition, however, is, now, in the nature of further relief claimed by the petitioner in connection with the same F.I.R. After registration of the F.I.R, the properties of the petitioner listed in the Schedule of the properties marked at Exh.H, belonging to the petitioner and his relatives, were taken over by the Investigating Officer. Besides, the bank accounts and bank lockers of the petitioner and his relatives was also ordered to be freezed by the I.O. 4. Considering the fact that the Department, itself, was of the considered opinion that no case was made out for launching of the prosecution against the petitioner; and more so, the F.I.R. in question having been quashed by this Court, the I.O. ought to have taken steps on his own to return the properties seized by him to the petitioner as also instruct the concerned Banks to the defreeze bank accounts and bank lockers of the petitioner and his relatives. Learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I., in all fairness, accepts that there is no provision which can permit the Investigating Officer to continue to hold the 3 wp-3351-10 properties seized during the investigation even though the F.I.R. itself has been quashed and no further investigation in connection with the said F.I.R. would arise. At the same time, however, he submits that the Department is in process of scrutinizing the documents, so as to inquire into the disproportionate assets of the petitioner and depending on the outcome of the same, it is possible that the Department may register another F.I.R. and in the context of that F.I.R. the properties of the petitioner and his relatives, which are presently seized in connection with the F.I.R., which has been already quashed, may have to be taken over in connection with the said case. 5. In this context, on instructions, of the Investigating Officer, who is present in the Court, learned Counsel for the C.B.I. contends that the Investigating Officer will take steps to inform the concerned bank to defreeze the bank accounts and bank lockers of the petitioner as well as his relatives forthwith. As also hand over properties and original documents, which have been seized during the investigation of the F.I.R., which has been quashed, to the petitioner; subject to petitioner giving undertaking that as and when required in future he would make available the said properties and original documents in connection with the investigation of some other case, if any, and in any case the petitioner will not create any third party right, title and/or interest in 4 wp-3351-10 the immoveable properties at least for a period of four months from today. 6. The petitioner who is present in the Court through Counsel has been asked to give such undertaking. Since the petitioner has given the undertaking, we have no difficulty in disposing of this petition on the basis of assurance given by the Investigating Officer that instructions would be immediately issued to the concerned banks to defreeze the bank accounts and bank lockers of the petitioner and his relatives and also to return the properties as well as original documents seized during the investigation of the F.I.R. which has been quashed by this Court to the petitioner forthwith, while retaining Photostat copies of the original documents for the pending inquiry. The undertaking given by the petitioner on the above terms is accepted. Order accordingly. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)