High Court Karnataka High Court

G Shafi vs State By on 5 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
G Shafi vs State By on 5 August, 2010
Author: Subhash B.Adi
IN THE HIGH cou R? o:= mmrm AT sAwcA;c;=:E f 1 

mm THIS 'me 5"' my GF1§\§{3UST.2$iu§:'~"» A Q %
BE%RE  %' %  % A
we H::3N'sLE MR.3£}3T$'é.__Si18§¥E.€5Si-§ ks..:v.::§:':_§   1 %

 

EETWEEN:

G.Shafi, Am abwgz 48 yg!e%*s.."- '

Sic iai:eG.Me:1!a $3,  _,    
RfaNo.56,Kfifaima£:1i?ia§ar'*,.    
Hcxsget.      

 %%%%    'M  mpgrmoflm

(fly Sri.  E:§;5f'=§£§ii'§1sei for
Sri. PCV. i€'E--f;toc#r;V AdvI@::£.?$,)

Sta§é~%by.v?C¥£--V§:}§é'a§swamy Layout R5,,
Bangaimta.' 

_ _  ' 'kaptd. ..b§:a.the State Pubiic Pmsecutar,
 ~   _'I-flgb Ccurt af Kamataka, Bangafare.

 (§£§}ifi Satish R. Girii, HCGP)

. . . RESPSN SENT

Thifi Cr!.P. 3 flied amdar Section 432 Cr.P.C.,. praying
to quash the pmcewings new pending befare the IV MMTC,
aangalore arising out of tha C::Ne.394,J'09 cf respondent

P3 $235.

This Cr£P. earning can for orders this day, t¥’s:e ‘€§i:’:§:.,i:R”

made the fo¥§uwing:-

Fefitioner has sought for. quaséiinfi’ 9? thafs ;:!f{3£;e’aé ” L

in crime K3394/2M9 registar76@:t33i xunwrasmmggaym %

Palice Station, 8\angaksifaa:~..’_Cit3;f,i””‘f§:? $5″.tsffer2c§é”‘p1}i’:ishab!a
under sectian 93 (xi am if{§rE$§t¥%§i{?§af’v?¢i§¢fe;*.’§.g§g.. 1953.

2. ~ V gofiauei’ pprehendaw the
pefiticna?”‘at’:5 i:wS:f:-§Vdtfier§§;’ $§’:3gicve””i::heyr did nai: give any
sawfacfierf exp1§:n§§’§izj:_é§v«fgiflfjasving the possession sf 2; sum

of Rupem aha §_2:mr’e é:.~:~ s’;,;~;’.;h, the saw amen nt was seizsd.

that ncw the matter is parading before
Matmpoiitan Magistrami, fiamgalcsre.

H Vv .V At tfi§>s svi.:iaTg’e;fl3i5 petition has been fiiead.

. Sri. Sreevaaa, learned Senior Counsel appearing
‘ the mtitiwser submimd that, the baaiac ingrediansts of
Section 98 $1′ the Kamataka Police Act are not fem} coming

frcm the rnahazar and them is me afiiegatieon regarding the
possession of the money as the stolen praraerty or

acquisifwn by mud. He further submitted that the

appiicatim has wen fig! For refeaaa en?’ the

appmpfiating the same with income Tax 3:5.-;fi:art;§’:£é:*§*$%

the cfmmsai cf the case. Heyfiirtéter

though such an fipgfication is pre:§;i1’d.i_n:§,V_A.;*;hsb.}s;§ttj¢

ham dispcsed of.

5. So far as ‘;’cz:_r:cerf¥eV¢A:§, Sectian
98 of the Kar.nataka:’.ww–?I§éI§:.:e’A’*”‘ if there is
raasonable Q!’ is obtained
by frauduieim. s:!’*§aVf’£ seize such property.
Htswesér, release the amount
in favauf .91′ 3 accaunting is furnished. It

is s1{hmi.tted fit§’t”1t¥1aax’péatitioner as wait as Income Tax

% “haw fired the appticatean for refeasa or the

an appiication is pending before the

Iefirned ,5-*1agA§3éfate, ha sheufd have disposed 9f the set me.

“Nam: the pafitianefls ccsunsei submits that the
pégtitiwer has new obiecticrz to remfi: the ameunt ta Incema

Department. Learned Government Piaader has no

chjectisn to do w,

2′. In View car? the above, kzameé

diraearztad to fiansfer the seized mane-y to the,’V:§%a=,;;t5.:§:§§eL’._’f:ix*«’T

Gepartrmnt within me week, whicafi ‘fi§1_.a;.; .

decision in the case.

3. Axzcardingiy, the pei;§ti.§:%g~§t&::;§1s .&is=p§:§aHd, §ef.

Msu