Power of Police Officer to Seize certain Property - CRPC 102
Date : 25 Mar, 2022
Post By Pranjal Jain
INTRODUCTION TO SECTION 102 Section 102 CrPC provides power to the police to seize any property on suspicion of it being stolen or which has been found under suspicious circumstances. Section 102- Power of police officer to seize certain property. 1. Any police officer may seize any property which may be alleged or suspected to have been stolen, or which may be found under circumstances that create suspicion of the commission of any offence. 2. Such police officer, if subordinate to the office in charge of a police station, shall forthwith report the seizure to that officer. 3. Every police officer acting under subsection (1) shall forthwith report the seizure to the Magistrate having jurisdiction and where the property seized is such that it cannot be conveniently transported to the Court, or where there is difficulty in securing proper accommodation for the custody of such property, or where the continued retention of the property in police custody may not be considered necessary for the purpose of investigation, he may give custody thereof to any person on his executing a bond undertaking to produce the property before the Court as and when required and to give effect to the further orders of the Court as to the disposal of the same. Provided that where the property seized under subsection (1) is subject to speedy and natural decay and if the person entitled to the possession of such property is unknown or absent and the value of such property is less than five hundred rupees, it may forthwith be sold by auction under the orders of the Superintendent of Police and the provisions of Sections 457 and 458 shall, as nearly as may be practicable, apply to the net proceeds of such sale.
SALIENT FEATURES OF SECTION 102 • According to this section, if the police officer who is seizing the property is of a rank below than the police officer who is in charge of the police station, then that police officer who is a rank below has to inform and submit a report of seizure to the inspector in charge of the police station. In other words, any police officer, other than the inspector in charge of the police station, has seized the property, then that police officer has to submit the report to the inspector in charge. • Once the report has been submitted to the senior police officer or the inspector in charge, then that senior officer has to further submit the report to the magistrate of that jurisdiction where the police station is situated. • This section is not a mandatory provision and is only discretionary in nature. Subclause 1 of this section gives discretion to the police officer to seize property. This means that it is not mandatory for the police officer to seize property in case of any offence. The word ‘may’ in subclause 1 points towards the discretion of the police officer. Had it been ‘shall’ instead of ‘may’ in subclause 1, then this provision would have been mandatory in nature. • Property referred to in this section is of two kinds- moveable property and immovable property. • Moveable property is defined under section 22 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It includes any kind of property except land, anything attached to the land, anything fastened to something attached to the land. In other words, anything which is attached to the earth is not moveable property and will be considered immovable under the law. The word ‘property’ in section 102 includes ONLY moveable property and does not include immovable property. This will be further explained in the coming sections and case laws. • Analysis of the section brings out the fact that the property which is seized should not be harmed or left to decay or damaged under the police custody, that is the reason it is mentioned in section 102(3) that when the police think that the custody of property is no longer necessary, they should assign to someone who can care for the property and bring it to the court as and when required. Consult the best lawyer online PURPOSE OF SECTION 102 Section 102 and the power which it invests in the police officers have a few essential purposes for the delivery of justice. 1. The police officer takes the moveable property which is the subject matter of suspicion out of the custody of the person who owns that property so as to keep it from further damage. It is done so that the investigation with regards to that property is not hampered. The investigation under this section requires a detailed investigation of the property too and for that to happen, it is best when the police officer takes that property into his/her custody. 2. Property under this section also includes drugs and contraband. Contraband means the property the possession of which is illegal, to begin with. This also includes drugs and ammunition which is not licensed, firearms, gang-related items, etc. 3. Any property which forms the part of evidence or helps in smooth investigation of the offence can be seized by the police. RELEVANT CASE LAWS UNDER SECTION 102 1. Nevada Properties Private Limited Through Its Directors v. The State of Maharashtra and Another- Facts – this case was the result of an appeal that arose from the case adjudicated in the High court namely Kishore Shankar Signapurkar vs. The State of Maharashtra. In this case, the High court had held that the term’ property ‘under section 102 does not include immovable property. This case was hence brought before the Supreme court by way of an appeal. Issue- Whether the term ‘property’ under section 102 of CrPC includes immovable property. Judgement- the Supreme Court answered in the negative and sided with the decision of the High Court. The court stated that the property seized under this section is seized on mere suspicion. If the law puts discretion on the police officers to seize immovable property also only on the basis of discretion, that will give a lot of uncensored power to the police officers and the ends of justice will never be met. 2. State of Maharashtra vs. Tapas D. Neogey- Facts- in this case, the property which was seized was the bank account of the accused. There were some illegal money transfers made into the account of the accused. The High Court said that a bank account cannot be considered property under section 102 CrPC. The case went to the Supreme court. Issue- Whether bank accounts of the accused can be seized as property under section 102. Judgement- The Supreme court overturned the judgement of the High Court and stated that bank accounts can be seized if there is any direct link of the account seized with the commission of the offence. This is because if the bank accounts are not allowed to be seized under this section, the accused gets a lot of time to move that money or withdraw it before the court can look into the account. 3. Ms. Swaran Sabharwal vs. Commission of Police- Facts- in this case, the bank account of the petitioner o was seized, and the investigation officer said that the seizure was necessary because one of the accused in this case transferred some money to the petitioner’s account. Issue- Whether the seizing of property, in this case, was valid. Judgement- the High court refuted the argument put forward by the Investigating officer and said that section 102 requires the police officer to seize only that property which leads the officer to believe that some crime has been committed as against or in connection with the property which has been seized. In this case, the police officer could not establish a connection between the crime that took place and the account of the petitioner which was seized. Hence, the seizure was held invalid. ANALYSIS OF THE CASES DISCUSSED – • The term seize under this section means to take actual physical custody/control of the property. This can only be done for the moveable property because immovable property can’t be taken away physically. • The immovable property cannot be moved and hence can only be sealed. This is, however, not in the hands of the police officer investigating the case. Only the court of competent jurisdiction can seal the immovable property against any crime. • Any moveable property which is directly linked to the commission of the offence can be seized. There has to be a causal connection between the offence committed and that should lead the police officer to believe genuinely that the property in question needs to be seized. Looking for a Lawyer ? Lawtendo is a platform for you to help in hiring legal counsel. We work twenty-four hours to provide the best lawyers who suit the needs of the customers. We work with a wide range of lawyers whose areas of expertise range from divorce, court marriage, and registration, property possession delay, cheque, and money recovery; to will drafting and agreement, employment issues, and builder disputes. In addition to this, we also deal with cases of wrongful dishonour of cheques. Lawtendo is a hassle-free platform that works rigorously to make sure the best lawyer reaches their client in time.
