Seizure by NCB of illegal bank accounts in Sushant drug case: court

Two defendants, Jai Madhok and Zaid Vilatra, filed separate petitions with the special court indicating that their bank accounts had been seized by the NCB. Madhok’s plea says he has accounts at two banks, which informed him in October of last year that they were halting transactions.

Madhok’s plea said there was no claim that the bank accounts had proceeds related to the alleged crime. He said the investigating officer failed to inform a magistrate as required by article 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The BCN, through its Special Prosecutor (SPP), opposed the plea, saying its investigation is continuing. The court said that according to the CrPC, the police officer is required to report a seizure to the magistrate.

“In the absence of such a report, the said act of the investigator is held to be illegal. Although the learned SPP has filed the response, said response is silent on the point of compliance with subsection 3 of article 102 of the CrPC, ”said judge of the additional sessions DB Mane in his order. He authorized the thaw of the two bank accounts.

The order also ordered Madhok to file an affidavit stating that he would make the amount of the account balance available to the court to make necessary orders during the course of the case. He asked the NCB area unit in Mumbai to issue the necessary letters to the banks concerned.

A similar remedy was also awarded to Vilatra, who claimed that his bank account was seized without following the required procedure. Vilatra also argued that the amount corresponded to his catering business’s share of profits, had nothing to do with the alleged drug sale, and that the seizure made it difficult for him to meet his daily expenses.

In his case, too, the court said that the NCB had made no observations on whether a report had been given to the magistrate about the seizure.

In November, the court also authorized the unfreezing of the bank accounts of actress Rhea Chakraborty, named accused in the case after filing a plea claiming that her seizure caused her grave injustice because she had to pay her employees, discharge of its tax obligations. .

The court also this week allowed the return of the phones of one of the defendants and a request for overseas travel by another, finding that the investigation against him has been completed and an indictment has been filed. .