Karnataka HC Issues Guidelines For Magistrates Pertaining To Release Of Seized Properties U/S 451 & 457 Of CrPC
Karnataka HC Issues Guidelines for Magistrates Pertaining to Release of Seized Properties under Sections 451 & 457 CrPC
The Karnataka High Court has recently issued detailed guidelines for Magistrates on how to deal with applications for interim custody/release of seized property under Sections 451 & 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973.
Relevant Legal Provisions
Section 451 CrPC – Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial: Court may make such order as it thinks fit for proper custody of property produced during inquiry/trial.
Section 457 CrPC – Procedure by police upon seizure of property: Where seized property is not produced before the court during inquiry/trial, Magistrate may make orders for its disposal/custody/delivery to rightful owner.
Key Guidelines Issued by Karnataka HC
Expeditious Disposal
Applications under Sections 451 & 457 CrPC must be disposed of promptly and not kept pending unnecessarily, as seized property is prone to deterioration or misuse.
Preservation of Property
Magistrates must ensure photographs, detailed panchnamas, valuation reports, or videography (if necessary) are prepared before release.
This ensures that even if the property is released, there is adequate record for evidence during trial.
Execution of Bond/Undertaking
Release of property should be conditional on the applicant furnishing a bond or undertaking to produce the property as and when required by the Court.
Safeguards for Vehicles
In case of vehicles, the Court should consider releasing them to the owner after proper documentation since keeping vehicles in open yards leads to damage and depreciation.
Ownership & Bona Fides
Magistrates must verify ownership documents (RC book, invoices, etc.) before releasing property.
If multiple claimants exist, the Court may order the property to be retained until rightful ownership is established.
Perishable Items
Perishable goods or items likely to lose value must be disposed of at the earliest with proceeds kept in deposit, instead of letting them waste.
Accountability
Magistrates must record reasons for either granting or rejecting applications under Sections 451/457.
Orders must reflect a balance between interest of investigation, rights of owner, and preservation of evidence.
Supporting Case Laws
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283
– SC held that seized vehicles and properties should not be allowed to remain in police custody for long periods; Magistrates must release them promptly with safeguards.
Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil v. State of Mysore, (1977) 4 SCC 358
– Property should not be kept in custody for unnecessary time; valuable articles must be preserved with accountability.
General Insurance Council v. State of A.P., (2007) 12 SCC 354
– Reaffirmed that delay in disposal/release of vehicles causes unnecessary loss to the rightful owner.
✅ Conclusion
The Karnataka HC guidelines reinforce the principle that:
Magistrates must expedite release of seized property under Sections 451 & 457 CrPC.
Ensure documentary safeguards (photographs, panchnamas, bonds) before release.
Protect property from deterioration and balance investigation needs with ownership rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments