Identifying unlawfully acquired property
Section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with identifying unlawfully acquired property. The Court shall, under sub-section (1), or on receipt of a letter of request under sub-section (3) of section 105C, direct any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying such property. The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
(1) The Court shall, under sub-section (1), or on receipt of a letter of request under sub-section (3) of section 105C, direct any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying such property.
(2) The steps referred to in sub-section (1) may include any inquiry investigation or survey in respect of any person, place, property, assets, documents, books of account in any bank or public financial institutions or any other relevant matters.
(3) Any inquiry investigation or survey referred to in sub- section (2) shall be carried out by an officer mentioned in sub- section (1) in accordance with such directions issued by the said Court in this behalf.
105E
Section 105D, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 116 Identifying unlawfully acquired property Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
State of M. P vs Balram Mihani
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Chapter VII-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, provisions for attachment and forfeiture of property (Sections 105-A to 105-L) apply exclusively to offences that have international ramifications and involve reciprocal arrangements with contracting states as defined in Section 105-A(a), and do not apply to local offences committed within India such as gambling and ordinary offences under the Indian Penal Code. The proper interpretation requires reading the general language of Section 105-C(1) in the contextual background of the chapter's purpose as demonstrated by the Statement of Objects and Reasons, the legislative history, and the specific references throughout the chapter to contracting states and international criminal cooperation mechanisms.
On this section: Police officer authorization to trace and identify property applied only in context of international crimes and contracting state arrangements
-
Muhammed Hasheer Poolakkal vs The United Arab Bank
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The powers of the court under Chapter VIIA of the Criminal Procedure Code for attachment and forfeiture of property derived from commission of an offence can be invoked only on the basis of a request or application being made by the Central Government or any other competent authorities specifically authorized by the Central Government in this regard, and not on the basis of direct applications from private individuals or institutions. This is because Chapter VIIA was introduced based on international treaties and agreements, the procedure for processing such requests involves examination of matters affecting national sovereignty, security, public order and essential public interest which only the Central Government is competent to adjudicate, and the legislative intent does not contemplate direct access by private parties to invoke these powers.
On this section: Provides that court shall direct police officer not below rank of Sub-Inspector to trace and identify property. Court interpreted this provision in conjunction with Section 105C to determine the scope of court's powers and sources from which proceedings can be initiated.
-
Rajesh Natwarlal Bangawala vs C.b.i.b.s and F.c.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal cases involving alleged fraud and siphoning of funds, while courts have authority under Chapter VII-A of the Criminal Procedure Code to attach and seize property to prevent dissipation of proceeds, such seizure must be preceded by or accompanied by notice to the accused enabling him to provide explanation regarding the source of income and assets. The correct terminology for interim asset protection is 'seizure' rather than 'forfeiture', and procedural compliance with Sections 105C to 105G is mandatory. However, if the lower court has already directed the investigating officer to issue notice and submit a report, there is substantial compliance with procedural requirements, and the appellate court may modify the order to correct terminology while upholding the substance of asset protection.
On this section: Procedure for attachment - specifies procedural requirements for attachment orders
-
Central Bureau of Investigation vs Rajesh Natwarlal Bangawala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal cases involving attachment and forfeiture of property under Chapter VII-A of the Criminal Procedure Code (Sections 105C to 105G), the court must: (1) Use the correct legal terminology - 'seizure' for interim orders and 'forfeiture' for final orders; (2) Provide notice to the accused before passing an attachment/forfeiture order; (3) Give the accused an opportunity to explain the source of income and earning of the assets; (4) Ensure compliance with the procedural safeguards laid down in Sections 105C to 105G; and (5) Direct the investigating officer to issue notice and obtain explanation from the accused before final forfeiture orders are passed.
On this section: Procedure for attachment of property
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… The learned Magistrate by his order dated 21/1/2010, made an order of attachment of the said properties by specifically referring to the provision of Section 105D (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5 The petitioner has approached this Court by filing a Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, praying that the order dated 21st January, 2010 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai be quashed and set aside. Borey 2/3 6 Mr. …
Questions about Section 105D
What have the courts held on Section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
State of M. P vs Balram Mihani (01 Feb 2010) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Police officer authorization to trace and identify property applied only in context of international crimes and contracting state arrangements. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2010 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 105D, section 105D CRPC, section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with State of M. P vs Balram Mihani (01 Feb 2010).
What should I read with Section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 105C (Assistance in relation to orders of attachment or forefeiture ofproperty), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 116 (Identifying unlawfully acquired property), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 105D of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 105D, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.