# Raju Maurya v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2025) 3 ILRA 853
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-12-10
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482 No. 25039 of 2024
- **Bench:** Vinod Diwakar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/raju-maurya-v-state-of-u-p-ors-52571
- **Pages:** 12

## Headnote

Law-The
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure,1973-Sections
82
&
83
Application for release of the attached
goods-
In
the
present
case,
without
determining the truth- whether it was a case of
elopement or active companionship the police
charge-sheeted eight family members without
ascertaining the facts from the boy against
whom allegations were made regarding the
elopement of a young girl. Furthermore, the
police attached all movable and immovable
goods present in the family's house without
verifying the ownership of the property---The
court overlooked the critical fact that the seized
property did
not belong to the alleged
absconder--- There is an urgent need for both
trial courts and the police to adhere to minimum
legal and procedural standards while issuing and
executing judicial orders. Such orders must be
passed and implemented in a manner that is
fair, lawful, and transparent, ensuring the
protection of constitutional rights and upholding
public trust in the judicial system particularly
crucial in matters involving (i) the issuance of
proclamations for absconding persons, (ii) the
attachment of property, (iii) the identification
and seizure of assets belonging to proclaimed
offenders, and (iv) the adjudication of claims
and objections related to such attachments. By
ensuring strict adherence to legal principles and
procedural safeguards, the judiciary and law
enforcement agencies can uphold the rule of
law, protect individual rights, and restore public
confidence in the justice system---Proceedings
against the applicant and other accused persons
stand quashed. (Para 19, 26 30 & 32)
854 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Petition allowed. (E-15)

List of Cases cited:

St. of Bihar & anr. Vs J.A.C. Saldanha & ors.
1980 SCC(CRI) 272

## Text

3 All. Raju Maurya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
853
Devinder Bajaj and another,
(2010) 8 SCC 1.

36. In the aforesaid circumstances,
this Court is of the view that ends of justice
can be met by allowing the writ petition,
setting aside the ex-parte judgment and
decree dated 24.10.2008 on payment of
costs of Rs.30,000/- [Rs.20,000/- shall be
payable to the plaintiffs and Rs.10,000/-
shall be deposited with the District Legal
Service Authority, Pratapgarh] within a
period of two weeks from today. The
proceedings of O.S. No.1486/2003 shall
stand restored to its original number where
the parties shall appear before the trial
Court on 16.04.2025. The suit shall
proceed from the stage the plaintiffs had
moved an application for amendment. The
defendants shall be given reasonable
opportunity to contest the suit including by
filing their objections to the amendment
application. The parties shall be free to lead
fresh evidence. The parties are directed to
cooperate in the proceedings of O.S.
No.1486/2003. Any party choosing to
misuse the liberty shall be saddled with
costs to be enhanced progressively. The
trial Court shall endeavour to decided the
O.S.
No.1486/2003
expeditiously
preferably within a period of six months
from the date parties appear before the trial
Court. It is made clear that if the costs, as
directed by this Court, are not paid then the
proceedings shall not be revived.

37.

With
the
aforesaid
observations, the writ petition is allowed.
----------
(2025) 3 ILRA 853
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.12.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

Application U/S 482 No. 25039 of 2024

Raju Maurya ...Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicants:
R P Jain

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A., Ranjana Singh, Shesh Nath Singh
Yadav

Criminal
Law-The
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure,1973-Sections
82
&
83
Application for release of the attached
goods-
In
the
present
case,
without
determining the truth- whether it was a case of
elopement or active companionship the police
charge-sheeted eight family members without
ascertaining the facts from the boy against
whom allegations were made regarding the
elopement of a young girl. Furthermore, the
police attached all movable and immovable
goods present in the family's house without
verifying the ownership of the property---The
court overlooked the critical fact that the seized
property did
not belong to the alleged
absconder--- There is an urgent need for both
trial courts and the police to adhere to minimum
legal and procedural standards while issuing and
executing judicial orders. Such orders must be
passed and implemented in a manner that is
fair, lawful, and transparent, ensuring the
protection of constitutional rights and upholding
public trust in the judicial system particularly
crucial in matters involving (i) the issuance of
proclamations for absconding persons, (ii) the
attachment of property, (iii) the identification
and seizure of assets belonging to proclaimed
offenders, and (iv) the adjudication of claims
and objections related to such attachments. By
ensuring strict adherence to legal principles and
procedural safeguards, the judiciary and law
enforcement agencies can uphold the rule of
law, protect individual rights, and restore public
confidence in the justice system---Proceedings
against the applicant and other accused persons
stand quashed. (Para 19, 26 30 & 32)
854 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Petition allowed. (E-15)

List of Cases cited:

St. of Bihar & anr. Vs J.A.C. Saldanha & ors.
1980 SCC(CRI) 272

(Delivered by Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar, J.)

1. Heard Shri R.P. Rajan, learned
counsel for the applicant, Shri Vibhav
Anand, learned A.G.A. for the Staterespondent,
learned
counsel
for
the
opposite party no.2, and perused the record.

2.

Shri
Mohit
Agarwal,
Commissioner
of
Police,
Varanasi,
appeared
virtually
through
video
conferencing.

3. The present application has been
preferred with the prayer to quash the
impugned order dated 1.4.2024, passed in
Special Session Trial No.1203 of 2021,
arising out of Case Crime No. 212 of 2021,
under Sections 363, 366, 368 I.P.C. read
with section 16/17 of POCSO Act,
registered at P.S. Chaubepur, DistrictVaranasi, pending trial in the court of
learned Additional District and Sessions
Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court
No.3, Varanasi, whereby the applicant's
application for release of the goods was
rejected.

4. After hearing learned counsel for
the applicant, on examining the seizure
memo of goods attached and perusal of the
impugned order, this Court vide order dated
11.11.2024 directed the Commissioner of
Police,
Varanasi,
to
appear
virtually
through video conferencing and file a
personal affidavit containing the day-to-day
steps taken by the police to recover
Awadhesh Maurya and Jyoti Yadav, who
had gone missing on 10.05.2021. The
relevant portion of the aforesaid order has
been extracted below:

"3. Learned counsel for the
applicant submits that the applicant is the
real brother of Awadhesh Maurya, who
was working as driver in the informant's
firm. In the First Information Report, it is
alleged that the brother of the applicant
has abducted minor daughter of the
complainant, and the applicant and twothree unknown persons assisted him in
abduction. The younger brother of the
applicant is also made a co-accused in the
instant case, who is still missing along with
the daughter of the complainant prior to
the date of registration of FIR. Learned
counsel further submits that no evidence to
support the bald allegation surfaced during
the investigation qua applicant. At belated
stage of investigation with ulterior motives,
the applicant's name has been roped in the
instant case at behest of mother of the
victim along with other co-accused.

4. The main accused Awadhesh
Maurya- who is stated to have eloped the
complainant's daughter- could not be
traced by the police, and therefore,
proceedings u/s 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. have been
initiated, consequently, the police attached
the applicant's family property, earned by
the father-accused. Subsequently, the father
of the applicant moved an application for
release of the goods, which was partly
allowed by court, and vide order dated
14.02.2022 and a loader (tempo) bearing
A7L1144062 was released in favour of
father of applicant. After that the applicant
moved an application for release of his
goods, but due to certain error, the
application
was
not
pressed,
and
consequently dismissed. The applicant
again moved another application for
release of the seized household articles,
3 All. Raju Maurya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
855
which was rejected by the trial court vide
impugned order 01.04.2024.

5. On perusal of the impugned
order, it is nowhere mentioned that the
attached property was purchased from the
earning of the co-accused Awadhesh
Maurya, neither any receipt regarding
purchase of the seized goods is on record.
The trial court has erroneously failed to
consider the fact that the applicant and his
father (co-accused) are regularly joining
the court proceedings, and therefore, the
property (household goods) cannot be
attached without satisfying itself that the
seized property is earned by the absconder,
and there is no proof on record to this
effect. Therefore, trial court is directed to
immediately after receipt a copy of this
order release the entire goods seized vide
seizure memo 25.12.2021 and shall ensure
that the goods are in the same condition as
it were at the time of seizure. The
compliance report shall be forwarded to
this Court on or before the next date of
hearing.

6.
During
the
course
of
arguments, the applicant's counsel has
raised serious apprehension that his
younger brother and the victim have been
done to death by the complainant and his
family members. Since, there is a strong
whisper in the village about the honour
killing of his brother and the victim by the
complainant. The police has also not taken
a serious step to locate the co-accused
Awadhesh Maurya and the victim- Jyoti
Yadav since both disappeared from the
village.

7. After taking overall stock of
facts-circumstances of the case, I find that
the applicant's apprehension is reasonable,
and therefore, the Commissioner of Police,
Varanasi, is directed to file his personal
affidavit containing the day-to-day steps
taken by the police to locate Awadhesh
Maurya and Jyoti Yadav, and shall remain
present before this Court virtually through
video conferencing at 10:00 a.m."

5. In terms of the aforesaid order,
learned A.G.A. handed over the personal
affidavit of the commissioner of police to
the Court, and the same has been taken on
record. Upon examining the contents of the
affidavit, the following facts have been
noted;

5.1 An FIR being Case Crime No.
212 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 368
of the I.P.C., was lodged by Shri Shambhu
Yadav
at
P.S.
Chaubepur,
District
Varanasi, alleging that on 10.05.2021 the
complainant's minor daughter, aged about
17 years, had been eloped with one
Awadhesh Maurya, and since then, her
whereabouts have remained untraceable.

5.2 After registration of the FIR,
the complainant's statement was recorded
on the same day by the investigating officer
and possible hideouts of the accused and
victim
were
searched
on
15.05.202.
Thereafter, based on CDR analysis, the
possible hideouts in Mumbai was also
searched on 28.05.2021.

5.3 A team was constituted under
the C.O. Pindra, Commissionerate Varanasi
to locate the accused and victim. TalashGashti was also issued, and a public
broadcast was also made on 26.08.2021 on
Doordarshan and Akashwani.

5.4 After collecting evidence, coaccused Subhash Maurya, Akshay Maurya,
and
Ajit
Maurya
were
arrested
on
20.06.2021, while co-accused Surya Nath
Maurya and Raju Maurya were arrested on
17.09.2021. All the accused were sent to
jail.

5.5 On 18.09.2021, two police
teams were reconstituted to search for the
accused and the victim by the S.P. (Rural),
856 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Commissionerate Varanasi: (a) One team
was formed by the local police, and (b)
Another team was constituted by the Crime
Branch.

5.6 Proceedings under Section 82
Cr.P.C. were initiated against accused
Awadhesh
Maurya
on
27.09.2021,
followed by proceedings under Section 83
Cr.P.C. on 09.11.2021.

5.7 The accused's location was
traced to Maharashtra; however, despite all
efforts, the police could not recover the
victim.

5.8
From
13.05.2021
to
04.12.2024, the police documented the
steps taken during the investigation in 104
case diary entries, but no fruitful results
were obtained.

6. The personal affidavit of the
Commissioner of Police further reveals that
upon receipt of the order passed by this
Court,
the
Assistant
Commissioner,
Sarnath,
Varanasi,
was
directed
to
investigate the lapses committed by the
investigating officers and submit a report
within
ten
days.
Subsequently,
on
05.12.2024, the Commissioner of Police
reconstituted a team under the Assistant
Commissioner
of
Police,
Sarnath,
comprising
the
In-Charge
of
the
Surveillance Cell, the In-Charge of S.O.G.,
Commissionerate
Varanasi,
and
the
Investigating Officer of P.S. Chaubepur,
Varanasi. The team was instructed to utilize
all available resources to recover the
victim.

7. As a result, the victim was
successfully recovered, and the accused,
Awadhesh Maurya, was arrested by the
police on 07.12.2024 from Pimpalgaon,
District Nashik, Maharashtra. The police
obtained a transit remand from the learned
Judicial
Magistrate,
F.C.
Pimpalgaon,
Niphad, District Nashik, Maharashtra.
Subsequently, charges under Section 68 of
the IPC and Sections 16/17 of the POCSO
Act were added. The accused was later
released on bail. It has come to light that
the boy and the girl got married soon after
leaving their village and had been living
together happily in Nashik prior to their
arrest. Recently, they were blessed with a
child.

8. With regard to the direction for the
release of the attached goods, the same
were released by the learned Additional
District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge
(POCSO Act) in favour of the applicant,
Raju Maurya, vide order dated 07.12.2024.
The goods were released through a
Supurdginama, annexed on page 29 of the
personal affidavit, in compliance with the
order dated 11.11.2024.

9. To summarize the background of
the case, an FIR was registered alleging
that a 17-year-old girl had eloped with a
young boy from the same village. During
the investigation, the police arrested five
members of the boy's family, who were
later released on bail. A chargesheet was
filed against all five male and three female
members of the household, who had
secured anticipatory bail from the court.
Additionally, the police attached the entire
household goods used by the family on
25.12.2021. The list of the attached goods
is outlined below:

Sr.
No.
Description of
Items
Quantity
Value
in (Rs.)
1.
Old
used
bicycle
2 pieces
100
2.
Old used Cot
1 piece
80
3.
Old used table
1 piece
20
4.
Wooden plank
1 piece
15
5.
Stool
2 pieces
28
3 All. Raju Maurya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
857
6.
One stone plate
of grinder
1 piece
5
7.
Wooden bed
1 piece
75
8.
Small battery
2 pieces
40
9.
Charger
1 piece
10
10.
Big-size
tin
box
1 piece
50
11.
Wooden plank
2 01
80
12.
Iron drum
1 piece
15
13.
A plastic drum
with 10 kg of
rice
1 piece
80
14.
Kathari
(bed
sheet)
4 piece
16
15.
Bed sheet
1 piece
35
16.
Blanket
2 piece
8
17.
Wooden plank
2 piece
100
18.
Make-up
box
with stool
017
30
19.
Iron Almirah

120
20.
Mattress
02
15
21.
Old used tin
box
01

22.
Old
ladies
purse
01
20
23.
Old Saree
06
24
24.
Male dhoti
02
3
25.
Gamchha
03
3
26.
Suit Salwar
02
4
27.
Old Jacket
01
2
28.
Ladies
old
shawl
01
1
29.
Kids
school
dress
01
1
30.
Old leggings
01
1
31.
Old frock
02
1
32.
Half sweater
02
2
33.
Muffler
01
1
34.
Ladies muffler
01
1
35.
Stole
05
5
36.
Blouse
01
2
37.
Maxi
06
6
38.
Suit salwar
06
6
39.
Pillow
06
6
40.
Small
bed
kathari
10
10
41.
Small LG TV
01
150
42.
Small grinder
stone
1 pair
5
43.
Tin drum with
10 kg wheat
01
25
44.
Tin drum with
10 kg rice
01
25
45.
Wooden
double bed
01
25
46.
Broken plastic
ataini
01
2
47.
wooden dholak
01
1
48.
Plastic tal
01
2
49.
broken
small
tin box
02
1
50.
Ceiling fan
01
15
51.
Grindstone
hand grinder
01
2
52.
one
bucket
iron/steel
02
2
53.
small
steel
bowl
04
1
54.
Steel lota
01
1
55.
Steel glass
01
1
56.
Old used iron
griddle
01
5
57.
Old used tongs
02
2
58.
Old used steel
plate
01
1
59.
Small
steel
sieve
01
1
60.
Old used steel
plate
01
1
61.
Old
used
broken roller
01
2
62.
Old
used
a
small spoon
03
2
63.
Old used rope
01
1
64.
Five
packets
rice
150 kg

65.
Six
packets
wheat
160 kg
600
858 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
66.
Two
packets
paddy
45 kg
320
67.
Broken
iron
dhai
01
5
68.
Four
packets
wheat
80 kg
160
69.
Old
used
winnowing
basket
01
1
70.
A bottle of 20
ml oil
01
1
71.
An iron bottle
of
50
gram
turmeric
without cap

2
72.
Plastic
bottle
of
5-gram
chilli

1
73.
Plastic
bottle
of 50-gram salt

1
74.
A broken comb
and
a
small
mirror

2
75.
Wooden bench
01
1
76.
Wall clock
01
5
77.
Old
used
broom
01
2
78.
Broken handmade fan
02
1
79.
A red colour
plastic bottle of
5 litre
02
2
80.
Old used CFL
bulb
05
20
81.
Broken plastic
chair
02
20
82.
Iron crusher
01
450
83.
Diesel engine
01
1250
84.
Old
Alfa
Tempo Goods
vehicle
01
15,000
85.
Old iron rod
01
750
86.
Ruined
iron
thrasher
01
35
machine
87
Fodder
machine
01
50
88.
Old
used
jaggery
cauldron
01
50
89.
Broken
window
01
10

10. After the attachment of the goods,
the father of the boy filed an application for
their release. Vide order dated 14.02.2022,
a loader bearing No. A7L1144062 was
released in favour of the applicant, whereas
the application for the release of other
goods was rejected.

11. Thereafter, on 02.05.2023, the
applicant filed another application for the
release of the goods, submitting that none
of the attached goods were purchased by
the co-accused, Awadhesh Maurya, nor did
any of the articles mentioned in the seizure
memo belong to him. Therefore, the
household goods had been attached in
contravention of the law. However, the said
application was withdrawn as not pressed
on 19.02.2024.

12. Subsequently, a third application
was filed by the applicant, reiterating that
all the accused in this case, namely:

(i) Subham Maurya, (ii) Akshay
Maurya, (iii) Ajit Maurya, (iv) Surya Nath
Maurya, (v) Raju Maurya, (vi) Savitri Devi,
(vii) Kanchan Maurya, and (viii) Malti
Maurya are on bail, and the goods attached
by the police do not belong to the coaccused, Awadhesh Maurya. The applicant
further submitted that the goods are
deteriorating with each passing day and
that the entire family has been facing
hardship in managing their day-to-day
3 All. Raju Maurya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
859
affairs. However, the application was
rejected by the impugned order.

13. Had the police acted responsibly
and conducted a free, fair, and unbiased
investigation in a professional manner, the
two families would not have endured the
trauma they suffered. The entire family of
the young boy has been virtually left to
starve on the streets due to the actions of
the police, who failed to consider the
consequences of their decisions. The entire
investigation prima facie appears to be a
botched-up investigation for reasons best
known to the investigating officers who
had been part of the investigation team,
time
to
time.
The
actions
of
the
investigating officer are reminiscent of the
old colonial style of policing, carried out at
the dictates of their masters-the rulers of
India, the British- at the cost of the rule of
law and human values.

14. A brief historical overview of
policing in India may provide valuable
context for understanding the necessity of
police reforms. The police system in
colonial British India was fundamentally
designed to serve the interests of the British
Empire. The British colonial government
established a centralized police force in
India after the Revolt of 1857, formalized
through the Indian Police Act of 1861.

15. It appears, based on the given
facts, that the Indian police system, rooted
in colonial legacies, continues to operate
under
an
authoritarian
and
feudal
framework, which stands in stark contrast
to the principles of a community-driven
model of policing. Implementing such a
model requires extensive training programs
and resources to equip officers with the
skills
necessary
for
community
engagement,
conflict
resolution,
and
problem-solving. The lessons from this
dark chapter in history serve as a reminder
of the importance of accountability, ethical
governance, and the protection of civil
liberties in any democratic society.

16. A fair and effective investigation
is the backbone of the criminal justice
system. Any act that compromises the
integrity of an investigation can lead to
serious
procedural
consequences,
potentially undermining justice and eroding
public confidence in law enforcement. A
flawed investigation can result in either
wrongful
convictions
or
wrongful
acquittals, both of which are grave
miscarriages of justice. As in the present
case,
without
determining
the
truth-
whether it was a case of elopement or
active companionship- the police chargesheeted eight family members without
ascertaining the facts from the boy against
whom allegations were made regarding the
elopement of a young girl. Furthermore, the
police attached all movable and immovable
goods present in the family's house without
verifying the ownership of the property.

17. The purpose of Section 82 Cr.P.C.
(corresponding to Section 84 of the
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) is
not to penalize an absconding person but to
secure their presence. In contrast, Section
174-A of the IPC (corresponding to Section
209 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023)
prescribes punishment for a person who
fails to appear at the specified place and
time as required by a proclamation issued
under sub-section (4) of Section 82 Cr.P.C.
If declared a proclaimed offender, such a
person may face imprisonment for up to
seven years and a fine.

18. A harmonious reading of Sections
84 and 85 of the BNSS, 2023, reveals that
860 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
if a court has "reason to believe" (whether
based on evidence or otherwise) that a
person against whom a warrant has been
issued has absconded or is deliberately
concealing himself to evade execution, the
court may publish a written proclamation.
This proclamation requires the person to
appear at a specified place and time, not
less than 30 days from the date of its
publication.

19. Furthermore, the court issuing a
proclamation under Section 84 BNSS may,
for "reasons to be recorded" in writing,
order the attachment of any movable or
immovable property belonging to the
proclaimed person. Such an order may be
passed after the court is satisfied- by
affidavit or other means- that the person:

(a) is about to dispose of all or
part of his property, or

(b) is about to remove all or part
of his property from the local jurisdiction
of the court. In such cases, the court may
simultaneously order the attachment of the
property while issuing the proclamation,
provided that it follows the procedure and
satisfies the requirements outlined in
Sections 85(2), 85(3)(a)-(d), 85(4)(a)-(d),
85(5), and 85(6) of BNSS, 2023.

20. For Reference, Black's Law
Dictionary defines "belonging'' as: "which
pertains to, is connected with, or is the
rightful property of a person or entity''.
Similarly, Stroud's Judicial Dictionary
defines "belonging" as: "that which is the
rightful property or legally attached to a
person or entity, either by ownership,
possession or association''. The ownership
may be absolute or qualified, depending on
the nature of legal eyes conferred by the
statutes, contracts, or any other binding
precedent or customary practices.

21. In State Of Bihar & Anr v.
J.A.C. Saldanha & Ors, the Supreme
Court reiterated that an inquiry must be
distinguished from investigation and trial,
as each serves a different legal purpose.
The "inquiry'' means every inquiry, other
than the trial conducted under BNSS, 2023
by the Magistrate or Court. Inquiry by the
Magistrate or Court ensures procedural
fairness and protects individuals from
unwarranted prosecution. It involves a
conscious and judicious application of the
judge's mind to assess facts and evidence
and determine if legal action is warranted.
The primary purpose of an inquiry is to
determine whether a prima facie case exists
against the accused, warranting a trial. A
trial involves the formal adjudication of
guilt or innocence, with the prosecution
presenting evidence and the accused being
given the opportunity for defence.

22. This Court has observed that the
procedure
adopted
by
the
police,
particularly in rural areas, to enforce
attachment orders under Section 83 Cr.P.C.
is barbaric and devoid of legal propriety. It
has been noted that the police, acting
lawlessly,
forcibly
enter
villages
or
residential areas with a large contingent of
officers,
often
engaging
in
abusive
behaviour and wanton destruction. They
demolish mud or brick structures, destroy
huts made of chaff or mud, and seize all
household belongings, both movable and
immovable, without verifying ownership or
purchase details.

23. In cases where an absconder
resides within a joint family, the entire
household's
possessions
are
indiscriminately seized, without any effort
to ascertain legal ownership. Such actions
are carried out ruthlessly, in blatant
contravention of legal procedures, and in
3 All. Raju Maurya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
861
violation
of
property
rights
and
fundamental legal safeguards.

24. In the present case, neither was
the court satisfied with the requirements of
Section 83 Cr.P.C., nor did the police
verify the ownership of the seized goods.
Such violations by the courts and the police
have become routine.

25. It is the fundamental duty of
criminal courts to ensure that the police
conduct a fair, impartial, and thorough
investigation. The court must be prima
facie satisfied with the evidence collected
during the investigation against the accused
before taking cognizance of the case. In the
present matter, upon examining the list of
seized goods, it is evident that the conduct
of the police reflects a blatant disregard for
their duties and responsibilities. This Court
is compelled to observe that the officer
responsible for procuring the proclamation
order and subsequently enforcing it has
demonstrated a profound lack of respect for
his position, as well as a complete
disregard for basic human values. Such
actions not only undermine the integrity of
the judicial process but also erode public
trust in law enforcement agencies.

26. At the same time, the court also
failed to exercise its independent judicial
mind in evaluating the material presented
against the accused, all of whom are family
members
of
Awadhesh
Maurya.
Additionally, the court overlooked the
critical fact that the seized property did not
belong to the alleged absconder. The entire
family has been subjected to prosecution
without determining whether the young girl
left
voluntarily
or
was
enticed
by
Awadhesh Maurya, a young man from the
same village. Ironically, eight family
members are facing criminal prosecution
based solely on the unverified assertions of
the complainant and his wife, a claim that
has been disproven following the recovery
of the boy and girl.

27. Trial courts bear a statutory
obligation to supervise actions taken in
connection with the enforcement of orders
passed by constitutional courts. As the first
line of justice in the judicial system,
magistrates and district and sessions courts
play a pivotal role in safeguarding public
confidence in justice. When judges fail to
apply an independent judicial mind, or
when the police neglect their duties, it
causes irreparable damage to the rule of
law and undermines public trust in the
administration of justice. This Court
strongly
condemns
both
the
judge's
approach and the police's conduct in this
case, as such lapses are a matter of grave
concern for constitutional courts.

28. This Court has consistently
emphasized the need to sensitize trial court
judges, urging them to cultivate sharp legal
acumen, a profound sense of responsibility
toward their positions, and a commitment
to enhancing their legal knowledge with
diligence and dedication. It is imperative
for judges to adopt a progressive and
reformative approach, aligning with the
evolving demands of justice and the
expectations of a dynamic legal system. By
doing so, they can ensure fairness,
efficiency, and public trust in the judiciary,
which is the cornerstone of a robust
democratic society.

29. It is essential to underscore that
the collective conscience of judges must
serve as the guiding force behind their
decisions. Judges must fully engage their
judicial minds, demonstrating unwavering
responsibility and diligence in discharging
862 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
their duties. Regrettably, it has been
observed that some judges resort to
applying the "rule of exception" as a
blanket approach, often to conceal a lack of
confidence,
efficiency,
or
a
shallow
understanding of the law. In the present
case, the trial court failed to adhere to
statutory provisions and legal requirements,
particularly in declaring the co-accused a
proclaimed offender, issuing the attachment
order, and rejecting the application for the
release of goods. Such lapses not only
undermine the integrity of the judicial
process but also erode public trust in the
administration of justice. Therefore, it is
crucial for judges to adopt a progressive
and reformative approach, ensuring that
their decisions are rooted in fairness,
legality, and a deep sense of accountability.

30. There is an urgent need for both
trial courts and the police to adhere to
minimum legal and procedural standards
while issuing and executing judicial orders.
Such orders must be passed and implemented
in a manner that is fair, lawful, and
transparent, ensuring the protection of
constitutional rights and upholding public
trust in the judicial system. This is
particularly crucial in matters involving (i)
the issuance of proclamations for absconding
persons, (ii) the attachment of property, (iii)
the identification and seizure of assets
belonging to proclaimed offenders, and (iv)
the adjudication of claims and objections
related to such attachments. By ensuring
strict adherence to legal principles and
procedural safeguards, the judiciary and law
enforcement agencies can uphold the rule of
law, protect individual rights, and restore
public confidence in the justice system.

31. Based upon the aforementioned
deliberations, the following directions are
issued:

For the Courts

31.1 At the time of issuing a
written proclamation requiring a person to
appear at a specified place and time, not
less than 30 days from the date of
publication of such proclamation, the court
shall record "reasons to believe" in its order
that the person against whom a warrant has
been issued has absconded or is concealing
himself to evade execution of the warrant.
The
order
must
clearly
satisfy
the
requirements of Section 84 of the BNSS.

31.2 Before issuing an order of
attachment of property, whether movable,
immovable, or both, the court shall record
"reasons in writing" affirming that the
attached
property
"belongs"
to
the
proclaimed person. The order must also
satisfy the requirements of Section 85 of
the BNSS and reflect the independent
application of judicial mind by the court,
explicitly noting that the attached property
is owned by the proclaimed person.

31.3 If any claim or application is
submitted, or an objection is raised
regarding the attachment of property under
Section 85 of the BNSS by a person other
than the proclaimed person, asserting an
interest in the property and claiming that it
is not liable for attachment, the court shall
conduct a proper inquiry before the final
disposal of the claim or application.

31.4 For clarity, in the present
context, the term "any property, movable or
immovable, or both, 'belonging' to the
proclaimed person" refers to rightful
ownership, possession, or control of the
property by an individual against whom a
written proclamation has been issued by the
court, requiring them to appear at a
specified place and time, not less than 30
days from the date of publication of such
proclamation.
3 All. Raju Maurya Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
863

For the Police

31.5 The Investigating Officer
shall explicitly specify the details of the
property "belonging" to the absconding
person in an application under Section 85
of the BNSS. The officer must also
accurately
and clearly document the
ownership, possession, or association of the
attached property in the seizure memo. If it
is not possible to ascertain ownership, the
benefit of the doubt shall be given to the
proclaimed offender, particularly in cases
involving shared households or common
household items.

31.6 The execution of judicial
orders shall not be excessive, coercive, or
beyond the legal scope and procedure
established by law. Law enforcement
officers must ensure that the enforcement
of attachment orders should be carried out
in a fair, proportionate, and legally
compliant manner, avoiding unwarranted
hardship on innocent individuals.

32. In light of the facts and
circumstances outlined above, it is evident
that continuing the legal proceedings
against the applicant and the other accused
persons arising out of the impugned
charge- sheet filed in Case Crime No.212
of 2021, u/s 363, 366, 368 IPC and 16/17
of the POCSO Act, P.S. Chaubepur,
District
Varanasi,
would
serve
no
meaningful purpose and would amount to a
futile exercise. Given that the chances of
conviction are bleak, and considering that
accused Awadhesh Maurya and his wife
have been living together- solemnised
marriage and blessed with a child recently -
since the alleged incident, the ends of
justice would be best served by quashing
the proceedings against them. Accordingly,
to prevent the abuse of the process of law
and to uphold the principles of fairness and
justice,
the
proceedings
against
the
applicant and other accused persons stand
quashed.

33. As the order dated 11.11.2024 has
already been complied with and the
applicant has received the goods, no fresh
order is required for release. Accordingly,
the present application is allowed in the
aforesaid terms.

34. The Registrar (Compliance) is
directed to send a copy of this order to:

(i) The Director General of Police
(D.G.P.), Uttar Pradesh, who shall, in turn,
forward the order to the Police In-Charge
of all Districts. The Police In-Charge of
each District shall then ensure that a copy
of this order is circulated to all Station
House
Officers
(S.H.Os.)
for
strict
compliance, reference, and record.

(ii) The D.G.P., Uttar Pradesh,
shall issue a notification/Government Order
(G.O.) in accordance with this order to all
concerned officers/S.H.Os. and shall ensure
its full compliance.

(iii) A departmental inquiry shall
be initiated against all police officers
involved in the investigation of the present
case up until the intervention by this Court.
The inquiry shall be concluded in a timebound manner.

(iv) All District Judges shall
immediately convene a meeting with all
judges within their respective judgeships to
ensure compliance with this order in letter
and spirit. The minutes of the meeting shall
be recorded and maintained for future
reference and record.

35. The learned District Judges and
the Director General of Police (D.G.P.),
Uttar Pradesh, are directed to file their
respective compliance reports within four
864 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
weeks from the date of receiving a copy of
this order. The reports shall be submitted
through the Registrar General of this Court
for Court's record.
----------
(2025) 3 ILRA 864
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 27.02.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
THE HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 2348 of 2021

Akram & Anr. ...Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Appellants:
Amrendra
Pratap
Singh,
Desh
Ratan
Chaudhary, Harishchandra Yadav, Ishwar
Chandra Tyagi, Masoom Alam, Praveen
Kumar Singh, Syed Imran Ibrahim, Syed
Shahnawaz Shah

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
G.A.

Criminal Law - Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 - Sections 161, 313 & 342 - Indian
Penal Code,1860 - Sections 34, 201, 302,
364, 404 & 411 - Evidence Act,1872 -
Section 27 - Criminal Appeal - against
conviction and sentenced - disappearance and
suspected murder case - FIR - offence of
abduction and murder - allegation was that the
accused killed deceased due to the reason that
he was in love with same girl - During
investigation, recoveries of a mobile phone,
weapon, skeletal remains, and clothing were
made on the basis of the accused's St.ments, -
chargesheet - Trial - conviction and sentenced -
Appeal - court finds that, recoveries were illegal
under Section 27 of the Evidence Act due to lack
of
independent
witnesses
and
memos,
contradictions
in
eyewitness
testimonies
weakened the "last seen" theory, no DNA test
was conducted despite medical advice, and
motive
was
neither
established
through
evidence nor put to the accused under Section
313 Cr.P.C. - held, major procedural and
evidentiary lapses, and the prosecution failed to
prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - hence,
Appeal is allowed - directions issued for
acquitting the appellants and setting aside the
trial court's judgment. (Para - 12, 14, 15)

Criminal Appeal Allowed. (E-11)

List of Cases cited:

1. Subramanya Vs St. of Karn. reported in
(2023) 11 SCC 255,

2. Digamber Vaishnav & anr. Vs St. of
Chhatisgarh 2019 4 SCC 522,

3. Daryao Singh Vs St. of M.P. reported in 1991
2 SCC 588,

4. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs St. of Maha.
reported in (1984) 4 SCC 116,

(Delivered by Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma, J.
&
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak, J.)

1. Upon the disappearance of one
Salman
on
6.11.2011,
a
Gumshudgi/missing
report
was
got
reported by his father Shamim S/o Bundu
Hasan. In the Gumshudgi report, it was
stated that the younger son of Shamim had,
from his telephone number 8126580512,
rung up the missing son of Shamim at his
phone number 8126573540 and the missing
son- Salman had informed the son who had
rung up that he was at Sidki, Saharanpur
and he would be reaching in half an hour.
However, when Salman did not reach his
house, the Gumshudgi Report was got
reported on 07.11.2011. This was exhibited
as 'Exhibit Ka-2'. When, however, a search
was made and Salman was not found then
on 15.11.2011 a First Information Report
was got lodged by the father of the missing