Rajasthan High Court directs release of seized gambling cash, mandates Income Tax verification

Background of the dispute

The matter in Imran Mansoori Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court) arose from a challenge to two judicial orders that declined to return a substantial amount of cash seized during a gambling investigation, despite the criminal case itself having been withdrawn.

An FIR bearing No.506/2021 was registered at Police Station Gumanpura, District Kota City, for an alleged offence under Section 13 of the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949 (RPGO). In the course of investigation, the police seized:

  • A mobile phone, and
  • Cash amounting to Rs.7,35,000/-

Subsequently, a charge sheet was filed before the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (First Class) No.5, Kota.

During the pendency of the trial, the Department of Home, Government of Rajasthan issued a Circular dated 11.11.2022, deciding to withdraw the pending criminal case against the petitioner. On the basis of this policy decision, the Public Prosecutor moved an application under Section 321 Cr.P.C. for withdrawal of prosecution, which was allowed by the Trial Court on 12.11.2022. As a result, the petitioner stood acquitted of the charge under Section 13 of the RPGO.

Following this acquittal, the petitioner approached the Trial Court seeking release of both the seized mobile phone and the seized cash of Rs.7,35,000/-.

  • The Trial Court, by order dated 25.04.2023, allowed release of the mobile phone (after deletion of its data),
  • But declined release of the seized cash.

The petitioner then filed a revision petition before the Additional Sessions Judge No.5, Kota (Revisional Court). That Court, by order dated 02.07.2024, upheld the Trial Court’s refusal to release the money, reasoning that since the amount was allegedly connected to gambling, it could not be returned unless the offence was tried.

Aggrieved by both these orders, the petitioner moved the Rajasthan High Court by way of a criminal miscellaneous petition.

Orders under challenge

Trial Court order dated 25.04.2023

The Trial Court:

  • Partly allowed the petitioner’s application for supurdagi of seized property.
  • Ordered release of the mobile phone after erasing its data.
  • Declined to direct release of the seized cash of Rs.7,35,000/-, and did not provide any cogent reasoning justifying continued retention of the money.

Revisional Court order dated 02.07.2024

The Revisional Court dismissed the petitioner’s revision petition and endorsed the Trial Court’s approach, holding in essence that:

  • Since the amount was allegedly linked to gambling activity,
  • Such money could not be ordered to be released,
  • Unless the underlying offence was taken to trial and adjudicated.

This view was taken even though the prosecution itself had been formally withdrawn under Section 321 Cr.P.C. and the petitioner had already been acquitted by virtue of that withdrawal.

Petitioner’s submissions before the High Court

The petitioner’s counsel argued as follows:

  1. Registration of case and seizure
    • An FIR under Section 13 of the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949 was registered against the petitioner.
    • During investigation, the Investigating Agency seized the petitioner’s mobile phone along with Rs.7,35,000/- in cash.
    • The petitioner was thereafter charge-sheeted before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (First Class) No.5, Kota.