MAHESH RAGHU KULAL vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025







IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 18 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

WRIT PETITION NO.5703 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. MAHESH RAGHU KULAL
S/O RAGHU MOOLYA
AGED 39 YEARS
NO.1-55-1, MURTHUGUDDE HOUSE
KADANDALE POST,
PALADKA,
DAKSHINA KANNADA
KARNATAKA – 574 226

2. SUSHMA MAHESH
W/O MAHESH
AGED 36 YEARS,
1-148, NEAR BAILU BEEDI HOUSE,
KOLAMBE, DAKSHINA KANNADA
KARNATAKA – 574142
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M, ADVOCATE)











Digitally
signed by R
MANJUNATHA
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HOME DEPARTMENT
REPRESENTED BY HOME SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560 001

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


2. THE TAHSILDAR
MAIDAN ROAD
MANGALORE -575001

3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PANAMBUR POLICE STATION,
MANGALURU - 560 045
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI WAHEEDA M.M., HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASHING THE
ORDER OF ATTACHMENT OF THE PROPERTY PASSED BY THE
CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AND CJM, MANGALORE VIDE
ORDER DATED 30.11.2022 IN CRIME NO.66/2022 (PANAMBUR
POLICE STATION) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri Vinod Kumar M., learned counsel for the
petitioners and Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. Petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal
Procedure with the following prayer:
“a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
writ quashing the order of attachment of the
property passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division
and CJM Mangalore, vide order dated 30/11/2022 in
Crime No.66/2022 (Panambur Police Station)
produced at Annexure E”.

3. At the outset, counsel for the petitioner would
submit that the jurisdictional Magistrate lack power under
Section 105 of Code of Criminal Procedure to attach the
property of the accused in view of the principles of the law
enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of
Madhyapradesh vs. Balram Mihani and others , reported in
(2010) 2 Supreme Court Cases 602 .

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025



4. He invited the attention of this Court to paragraphs
5 to 10, 14, 16, 18 and 19 of the said judgment which reads as
under:
5. Section 105-A(a) defines “contracting State” and
refers to any country or place outside India in respect of
which arrangements have been made by the Central
Government with the Government of such country
through a treaty or otherwise. Section 105-A(c) defines
proceeds of crime as under:
“105-A. (c) ‘proceeds of crime’ means any property
derived or obtained directly or indirectly, by any person as
a result of criminal activity (including crime involving
currency transfers) or the value of any such property;”
Section 105-A(d) defines the property as under:
“105-A. (d) ‘property’ means property and assets of
every description whether corporeal or incorporeal,
movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and deeds
and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such
property or assets derived or used in the commission of
an offence and includes property obtained through
proceeds of crime;”
6. Section 105-B deals with assistance in securing
arrest of persons on request from contracting States or
the arrest in the contracting States. Sub-section (1)
thereof starts with the words “Where a court in India”. So
also sub-section (3) starts with the aforementioned
words.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


7. Section 105-C is as under:
“105-C. Assistance in relation to orders of attachment
or forfeiture of property.—(1) Where a court in India has
reasonable grounds to believe that any property obtained
by any person is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly,
by such person from the commission of an offence, it may
make an order of attachment or forfeiture of such
property, as it may deem fit under the provisions of
Sections 105-D to 105-J (both inclusive).
(2) Where the court has made an order for attachment
or forfeiture of any property under sub-section (1), and
such property is suspected to be in a contracting State,
the court may issue a letter of request to a court or an
authority in the contracting State for execution of such
order.
(3) Where a letter of request is received by the Central
Government from a court or an authority in a contracting
State requesting attachment or forfeiture of the property
in India, derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any
person from the commission of an offence committed in
that contracting State, the Central Government may
forward such letter of request to the court, as it thinks fit,
for execution in accordance with the provisions of Sections
105-D to 105-J (both inclusive) or, as the case may be,
any other law for the time being in force.”
8. Section 105-D empowers the court to direct any
police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector to take
steps for tracing and identifying such property under
Section 105-C(1) or on receipt of letter of request under

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


sub-section (3) of Section 105-C. Section 105-E
empowers the officer conducting an inquiry or
investigation to make an order of seizure of such
property, if he has a reason to believe that such property
is likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any
manner which will result in disposal of the property.
Section 105-F relates to the power of court to appoint the
District Magistrate of any area or his nominee where the
property is situated to perform the functions of an
administrator of such property.
9. Section 105-G provides for show-cause notice
before forfeiture. Section 105-H deals with the forfeiture
of the property to the Central Government while Section
105-I empowers the court giving an option to the owner
of such property to pay, in lieu of forfeiture, the fine equal
to the market value of such property. Section 105-J takes
care of the situation where after making an order under
sub-section (1) of Section 105-E or the issue of a notice
under Section 105-G, the property stands transferred by
any mode whatsoever and further provides that such
transfer shall be ignored and also that such transfer of
property shall be deemed null and void. Section 105-L
deals with the applications and powers in this chapter.
10. The stress of the learned counsel is particularly on
Section 105-D and the learned counsel is at pains to point
out that Sections 105-C and 105-D can apply to any
property in India which is derived or obtained from the
commission of offence. Such offence could be even the
offence which does not have international ramifications.

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


The High Court has taken stock of all these sections and
referred to the heading of the Chapter, the Statement of
Objects and Reasons of the amending Act being Act 40 of
1993 and the speech of the Hon'ble Minister for Home
Affairs Shri S.B. Chavan (as he then was). From this the
High Court has come to the conclusion that firstly, the
provisions of Chapter VII-A are not the ordinary law of
land and further the provisions therein would be
applicable only to the offences which have international
ramifications. The High Court has further reached the
conclusion that the said provisions override the provisions
of Chapters V, VI and VII of the Code relating to search
and seizure during investigation.
14. In the Statement of Objects and Reasons to the
amending Act 40 of 1993 there is a clear-cut reference
that:
“The Government of India had signed an agreement
with the Government of United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland for extending assistance in the
investigation and prosecution of crime and the tracing,
restraint and confiscation of the proceeds of crime
(including crimes involving currency transfers) and
terrorist funds, with a view to check the terrorist activities
in India and the United Kingdom.”
16. We have even taken into consideration the speech
of the then Home Minister Shri S.B. Chavan which leaves
no doubt that this Chapter is not meant for the local
offences. When we see the applications as also the order
passed by the trial court, it is clear that it is only and only

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


in respect of the local offences like gambling and the
offences under IPC which are local. Even the properties
are not shown to be connected with crimes mentioned in
the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the amending
Act. In fact, no connection is established also between
crimes mentioned and the properties. Such properties are
clearly not included in Section 105-C. Though the
language of Section 105-C(1) is extremely general, its
being placed in Chapter VII-A cannot be lost sight of.
Again there is a clear-cut reference in sub-section (2)
thereof to the contracting State, the definition of which is
to be found in Section 105-A(a). It is, therefore, clear that
the property envisaged in Section 105-C(1) cannot be an
ordinary property earned out of ordinary offences
committed in India.
18. Lastly, we see the provisions of Section 105-L
which are clear that the Central Government may by
notification in the Official Gazette, direct that the
application of this Chapter in relation to a contracting
State with which there are reciprocal arrangements would
be subject to some conditions, exceptions and
qualifications as would be specified in the said notification.
It is, therefore, clear that the whole Chapter is a specific
chapter relating to the specified offences therein and has
nothing to do with the local offences or the properties
earned out of those.
19. At this juncture, it is pointed out that there are
specific other Central laws wherein the properties earned
out of trading of narcotic drugs and psychotropic

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


substances or the offences relating to smuggling or
financial offences relating to foreign exchange are liable to
be attached, seized and forfeited. Chapter VII-A is one
such measure to introduce stringent measures for
attachment and forfeiture of the properties earned by the
offences, by way of reciprocal arrangement in the
contracting countries. However, if we accept the State's
contention that the provisions of Chapter VII-A are for all
and sundry offences in India, it would be illogical.”

5. The above legal position is not disputed by counsel
for contesting respondent as well as the learned High Court
Government Pleader.

6. Facts in the present case is almost akin to the facts
involved in the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court.

7. Further, expressing any opinion on merits of the
matter at this stage would hamper the rights of the parties in
the trial one way or the other.

8. Suffice to say that the order of the Magistrate
cannot be countenanced in law in view of the principles of law
enunciated in the case of Balram Mihani supra.

9. Accordingly, case is made out to quash the order of
attachment of the property of the accused.

10. Hence, following:

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56929
WP No. 5703 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010085442025


ORDER

(i) Petition is allowed .

(ii) Order dated 30.11.2022 passed by the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangalore,
Dakshina Kannada vide order dated
30/11/2022 in Crime No.66/2022 at
Annexure-E is hereby quashed.


Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE


MR/VS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17