Final Order 1

Order Details: Order below Ex-1
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
47TH COURT, ESPLANADE, MUMBAI.
Case No. 3632/MISC/2023
(CNR No. MHMM-11-007706/2023)
M/s. Raksha Bullion ..Applicant.
(through its partner Mr. Parin Sanghvi)
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra.
(E.O.W. C.R. No. 82 of 2014)
(C.C. No.506/PW/2015) ..Respondent.
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW
OF FDR AMOUNT OF Rs.24,00,000/-
1. Present application is placed on record by
applicant/accused M/s. Raksha Bullion, a partnership firm through
its one of the partner Mr. Parin Sanghvi for permission to withdraw
FDR amount of Rs.24,00,000/- deposited by applicant as per order
dated 08.03.2018. Applicant’s case in short is that in connection
with crime registered against company its account No.
30815292303 came to be freezed by the police. Hence the present
applicant filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1002 of 2017 with
request to defreeze said account. This Court vide order dated
08.03.2018 allowed the application on the undertaking of
depositing Rs.24,00,000/- with State Bank of India, Bullion
Branch, Mumbai given by the present applicant. Accordingly that
application came to be allowed on 08.03.2018. In pursuance of
-- 1 of 5 --
2
undertaking given by present applicant vide pursis ‘Exh-I’ and as
directed by this Court by order dated 08.03.2018 he deposited
amount of Rs.24,00,000/- in FDR No.37595675289 on 16.03.2018
in the name of ‘Raksha Bullions’. Said FDR was for the period of
five years. After completion of five years period, applicant filed
present application and prayed that he may be permitted to
withdraw that amount contending that continuation of further
FDR is not at all called for. Hence, the present application.
2. Learned APP and Investigating officer filed his say to
this application. Learned APP opposed the application contending
that grounds mentioned in the application are not just and
reasonable. She further contended that if the application is
allowed accused will withdraw the amount. As such, she prayed to
reject the application. Investigating officer opposed the application
contending that the amount lying in the account of Raksha Bullion
maintained with SBI Bank bearing account No. 30815292303 was
crime proceeds. As such, he also prayed to reject the application.
3. Heard both sides.
4. In support of the application learned advocate for the
applicant submits that Court has directed to deposit amount of
Rs.24,00,000/- in FDR for a period of five years. That period of
five years has completed. Now that FDR is matured. But as amount
is kept in FDR by the order of this Court, the applicant cannot
-- 2 of 5 --
3
withdraw that amount without permission of this Court. Hence,
applicant prayed to allow him to withdraw said amount.
5. I am not agree with the aforesaid submissions
advanced by learned advocate for the applicant/accused. It is for
the reason that from the order (Exh J) placed on record by the
applicant, it appears that in C.C.No.1002/Misc./2017 defreezing
came to be allowed as applicant has given undertaking by pursis
(Exh I) to deposit amount of Rs.24,00,000/- in FDR. Only on that
condition account came to be defreezed. However the Court has
ordered to keep that amount in FDR for a period of five years. But
it does not mean that the Court has permitted to withdraw the
amount of FDR after its maturity. It is for the reason that as per
the prosecution case itself the amount lying in the account is crime
proceeds. Therefore if the applicant is allowed to withdraw
amount of Rs.24,00,000/- indirectly purpose of passing order by
this Court directing applicant to keep amount of Rs.24,00,000/- in
FDR will frustrate. Whether amount lying in the Court was crime
proceeds or otherwise that can be decided at the time of trial. At
this stage, even though FDR is matured applicant is not entitled for
withdrawal of money. However the bank needs to be directed to
roll on that FDR for the further period of two years and kept on
rolling subsequently for same period till disposal of the case. Thus
for the aforesaid reasons application is liable to be rejected. Hence,
I pass the following order.
-- 3 of 5 --
4
ORDER
1. Application is rejected.
2. Judicial Clerk of this Court is directed to inform the
State Bank of India, Bullion Branch, Mumbai to roll on aforesaid
FDR for further period of two years and keep it rolling for same
period of two years till the disposal of case.
Sd/-
(S.P. Shinde)
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Date :30/07/2024 47th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai.
-- 4 of 5 --
5
-- 5 of 5 --