ORDER : 1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the order passed by the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honavar in Crime No. 449/2016 dated 24.05.2018 for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC and Section 102 of Cr.P.C. and order dated 11.02.2019 in Crl. R.P. No. 49/2018 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar insofar as petitioner is concerned. 2. In the aforesaid crime, the Investigating Officer has seized the cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- along with Swift Car. The said amount has been subjected in PF and so also laid the charge-sheet against the accused in C.C. No. 47/2018. The petitioner herein who has filed an application under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. seeking interim custody of the said amount seized by the Investigating Officer and also it is subjected in PF. The petitioner who has paid the income tax and the money is official money and it was not black money. The petitioner by avocation as a Businessman doing business of rupees 30 to 40 lakhs per month turnover. Therefore, the petitioner herein is sought for claiming the seized amount. But the said application came to be rejected by the Court below in C.C. No. 449/2016. Against that order, the petitioner has preferred Criminal Revision Petition No. 49/2018, the said petition also came to be dismissed by its order dated 11.02.2019. In that impugned order, the revisional Court has observed that if the petitioner wants to claim interim custody of the seized liquid property i.e. money produced before the Judicial Magistrate and to file an application for interim custody of cash. At the same time, the prosecution has insisted that money be transmitted to the Income Tax Authorities. It is up to the prosecution to file an application to the Court seeking permission of entire amount shall be handing over to the Income Tax Department. So that they can appeal the said liquid property i.e. money at Rs. 37,78,000/- in accordance with Income Tax Act. This was the observation made by the Revisional Court and the said impugned order has been challenged under this petition by urging the various grounds. 3. So that they can appeal the said liquid property i.e. money at Rs. 37,78,000/- in accordance with Income Tax Act. This was the observation made by the Revisional Court and the said impugned order has been challenged under this petition by urging the various grounds. 3. In this petition, seeking for quashment of the order passed by the Court below in Criminal Revision Petition No. 49/2018 in its order dated 11.02.2019, whereby dismissed the said petition by confirming the order passed by the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honavar in Crime No. 449/2016 dated 24.05.2018, whereby rejected the application filed by the petitionerapplicant under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner who has taken a contention that the petitioner is a permanent abode of Ravulidani, Taluk Pachpadar, District Barmir of Rajasthan State and also having a business establishment and being a law abiding citizen. But there is no need to carry any permit like liquid and other materials as per the relevant provisions of law in order to carry the liquid properties i.e. cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/-. It is further contended that the petitioner is also having documents for having paid the tax as he being income tax assessee in respect of the business run by him in the name and style as M/s Jagadamba Agencies and Electrical situated at Sagara. In order to substantiate his contention, he has produced the document as Annexure-B and C. 5. Whereas, the petitioner who has filed an application under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. seeking interim custody of the liquid properties i.e. money in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- which has seized by the Investigating Officer and also subjected in PF and laid the charge-sheet against the accused before the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honavar, but the said application came to be dismissed. The same has been challenged before the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Karwar. The said revision petition was also came to be dismissed. The said contention is also taken and made it as a ground in this petition for seeking interim custody of that liquid property such as cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/-. The same has been challenged before the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Karwar. The said revision petition was also came to be dismissed. The said contention is also taken and made it as a ground in this petition for seeking interim custody of that liquid property such as cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/-. The application which was filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed without considering the reasons assigned in the application for seeking interim custody of the said liquid property. The petitioner being an income tax assessee, who has produced the income tax return which has submitted by him before the concerned income tax authorities. Therefore, the petitioner who is entitled for seeking interim custody of the said cash seized by the Investigating Officer by drawing mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses. But the involvement of the offence under Section 420 of IPC and also Section 102 of Cr.P.C. is based upon a suspicion and for having carried the huge amount. The Swift car has been released in favour of the owner of the said vehicle. But the cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- has been subjected in PF and the same has been produced before the Court below and it is in the custody of the said Court, where the accused is required to facing of a trial for the aforesaid offences laid in the charge-sheet. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner in further submits that the petitioner is constructing a house at Rajasthan as he being a permanent abode of that State, but he was running business in the limit of Sagara of Shivamogga district. If such huge money has been seized by the Investigating Officer, it is only on suspicion arise and the same will not fetch any interest even though the said amount has been produced before the Court below only for the reasons that amount is required to identify by the witnesses cited in the charge-sheet. But the petitioner will put to greater loss and he will sustain injury and also damages in the course of his business and loss, which cannot be compensated in terms of any money. But the petitioner will put to greater loss and he will sustain injury and also damages in the course of his business and loss, which cannot be compensated in terms of any money. These are all the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and seeking to allow this petition by quashment of the order passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honavar in Crime No. 449/2016 dated 24.05.2018, whereby rejecting an application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. The said impugned order passed by the Court below has been confirmed by the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar in Crl. R.P. No. 49/2018 dated 11.02.2019 by rejecting the said revision petition. 7. Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed for having interim custody of the said liquid properties such as, the cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- which was seized by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and also subjected in PF. 8. It is relevant to refer the judgment rendered in the case of Venkataraghavan vs. State by Bharathinagar and Another, ILR 2006 Kar. 3157. In this order extensively dealt the matter as under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seized notes in Courts custody, release of procedure to be followed, seizure of currency notes, direction of the Trial Court directing the concerned and the accused to be present before the Investigating Officer in the police station for disbursement of the currency notes. 9. The said judgment is squarely applicable to the present case on hand relating to the release of the interim custody of the cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- which seized by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and also subjected in PF. 10. On the other hand, learned HCGP for the State taken me through the charges levelled against the accused and so also huge amount in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- carried by the accused K. Abdul Latif in a swift car. 37,78,000/- which seized by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and also subjected in PF. 10. On the other hand, learned HCGP for the State taken me through the charges levelled against the accused and so also huge amount in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- carried by the accused K. Abdul Latif in a swift car. Based upon the written complaint on 07.12.2016 at about 04:00 a.m. in Honnavar P.S. the case in Crime No. 449/2016 came to be registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC, beside Section 102 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that when the swift car was intercepted and sought for explanation, the accused No. 1 has not been given satisfactory reply to the Investigating Agency and therefore, the said crime came to be registered that the amount was carried in the said swift car only with an intention to cheat the Income Tax Authorities. Same has been revealed in the charge-sheet laid against the accused in C.C. No. 47/2018. Though the charge-sheet has been laid against the accused in C.C. No. 47/2018, but this petitioner is not arraigned as accused for the aforesaid offences, mere because he has not been arraigned as accused in the alleged crime, he deserves for release of interim custody of the aforesaid amount. Therefore, the learned HCGP submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for release of the huge amount in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- seized by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and also subjected in PF and submitted that the accused are required to face the trial and the amount subjected in PF is required to the prosecution in order to identify the said liquid property during trial. These are all the contentions taken by the learned HCGP for the State and seeking for dismissal of the petition filed by the petitioner and to confirm the order passed by the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision Petition No. 49/2018 dated 11.02.2019. 11. It is in this context, it is relevant to refer the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking interim custody of the liquid property, such as huge amount of Rs. 37,78,000/-. 12. Whereas, in the aforesaid judgment referred supra, it has also referred the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, ILR 2003 Kar. 2243. 13. 37,78,000/-. 12. Whereas, in the aforesaid judgment referred supra, it has also referred the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, ILR 2003 Kar. 2243. 13. It is further seen that the material on record indicates that the amount which is seized belongs to the petitioner who has taken a contention that by avocation he is as a businessman and had carried huge amount of Rs. 37,78,000/- in a swift car driven by the 1st accused, but the Investigating Agency has been intercepted the said car and found huge amount of Rs. 37,78,000/- and when on enquiry, accused No. 1 did not substantiate the explanation sought by the Investigating Agency. Therefore, the FIR came to be registered and thereafter proceeded with the case for investigation and laid charge-sheet against the accused and amount of Rs. 37,78,000/- subjected in PF. 14. However, the aforesaid judgment has been referred for the purpose of consideration of the grounds urged seeking interim custody of the liquid property, such as huge amount of Rs. 37,78,000/- and the seized currency notes belongs to the petitioner which was carried to his native place Rajasthan state, wherein he intended to construct a house. Therefore, it requires to be taken into consideration keeping in view the grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 15. It is relevant to state that if the amount of Rs. 37,78,000/- released in favour of the petitioner, certainly by conducting mahazar by the Shirestedar (Admn.) of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honnavar, in the presence of the concerned Judicial Officer. These are all the directions required to be followed for releasing of the amount in favour of the petitioner. 16. For the aforesaid reasons and findings, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER: The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The order passed by the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada in Criminal Revision Petition No. 49/2018 dated 11.02.2019, whereby rejecting the petition by confirming the order passed by the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honnavar dated 24.05.2018 in Honnavar Police Station Crime No. 449/2016 whereby rejecting the application filed under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. is hereby set aside. In view of setting aside the impugned order, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed for release of the seized liquid property, such as, cash in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- seized by the Investigating Officer and subjected under P.F. subject to the following conditions: (i) Getting detailed proper panchanama prepared relating to the currency notes in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- seized in Crime No. 449/2016 of Honnavar Police Station, Honnavar. The said panchanama should be drawn by the Sheristedar (Admn.) of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honnavar, in the presence of two panch witnesses and in the actual and physical presence of the Presiding Officer of the Court. (ii) Subject the currency notes to photographs at the expenses of the State. The photographs of such currency notes in a sum of Rs. 37,78,000/- shall be taken in the presence of Sheristedar (Admn.) of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honnavar, in the presence of two panch witnesses and in the actual and physical presence of the Presiding Officer of the Court. The photographs shall be preserved by the concerned Court for marking as exhibits in the evidence of witnesses during the course of trial. (iii) The Sheristedar (Admn.) of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Honnavar, in the presence of two panch witnesses and in the actual and physical presence of the Presiding Officer of the Court shall subject that the photographs of currency notes are tested and countersigned by the petitioner. (iv) After taking self bond to the extent of Rs. 37,78,000/- with one surety for the like sum, the amount shall be handed over to the petitioner-complainant with due identification.