Summary
A larger Bench considered whether police seizure powers under section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code extended to immovable property. The Court answered that the provision did not authorise attachment, seizure or sealing of land or buildings. The investigative power to collect evidence did not confer authority to dispossess occupants or adjudicate title. Seizure of title documents remained distinct, and individual appeals were left for disposal by the appropriate Bench.
Issues
- Whether any property in section 102 included immovable property.
- Whether decisions permitting bank-account seizure resolved the scope of power over land and buildings.
Provisions considered
- Section 102, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The investigative seizure power did not authorise police attachment, seizure or sealing of immovable property. (¶¶ 4, 5, 18, 19, 20, 21)
Held
- Tapas D. Neogy decided that bank accounts could be property under section 102. It did not decide whether immovable property was covered; its ratio could not be enlarged by extracting observations from their factual context. (¶¶ 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
- Section 102 concerns investigation and collection of evidence. Its seizure mechanism, read with custody, transport and production provisions, does not confer power to dispossess occupants of immovable property on suspicion or decide competing civil claims. (¶¶ 12, 18, 19, 20)
- Specific statutory powers dealing with attachment, possession and court-ordered custody or disposal operate on their own conditions and do not enlarge police powers under section 102. Police may seize papers or title documents relating to land without thereby seizing the land itself. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20)
- In concurrence, Gupta J. emphasised the provision’s physical-custody language, longstanding application to movables and the Legislature’s express treatment of immovable property elsewhere. He reserved comment on the meaning of property under section 452 because it was outside the reference. (¶¶ Gupta J: 4, Gupta J: 5, Gupta J: 6, Gupta J: 7, Gupta J: 8, Gupta J: 9, Gupta J: 10, Gupta J: 11, Gupta J: 12)
Result
The reference was answered: section 102 did not empower police to attach, seize or seal immovable property. The Registry was directed to list the individual appeals for disposal before the appropriate Bench.