Seizure or attachment of property
Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with seizure or attachment of property. Where any officer conducting an inquiry or investigation under section 105D has a reason to believe that any property in relation to which such inquiry or investigation is being conducted is likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which will result in disposal of such propert 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 Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried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) Where any officer conducting an inquiry or investigation under section 105D has a reason to believe that any property in relation to which such inquiry or investigation is being conducted is likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which will result in disposal of such property, he may make an order for seizing such property and where it is not practicable to seize such property, he may make an order of attachment directing that such property shall not be transferred or otherwise dealt with, except with the prior permission of the officer making such order, and a copy of such order shall be served on the person concerned.
854C2
(2) Any order made under sub-section (1) shall have no effect unless the said order is confirmed by an order of the said Court within a period of thirty days of its being made.
105F
Section 105E, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 117 Seizure or attachment of 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
This section refers to
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.
-
Ketan Ramanlal Doshi vs The State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Property owners are entitled to possession of their premises under Section 457 Criminal Procedure Code despite criminal proceedings against licensees, provided the application for sealing was made under an inapplicable legal provision. The proper legal framework for sealing premises in prostitution cases is Section 18(1) of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, not Section 105E Cr.P.C, which applies only to cases with reciprocal international arrangements. Licensees' rights are limited to contractual remedies under the Leave and License Agreement and cannot override the owner's fundamental property rights.
On this section: Cited by the State for sealing the premises; Court held this provision is inapplicable as it pertains to reciprocal international arrangements for attachment and forfeiture, not domestic criminal cases
-
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 for seizure or attachment of property and confirmation of such orders by court within thirty days. Court considered this provision as part of overall Chapter VIIA framework.
-
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: Notice to person interested - requires notice to be given to person whose property is being attached
-
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: Custody and disposal of attached 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.
-
… In paragraph 3 of this petition, it has been noted that the petitioner has clean antecedent. It has been submitted that there was no seizure from the petitioner as it is clear from annexure-2 which is the seizure list and it has no signature of the petitioner and as such there was complete violation of Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Gaya Rail …
-
… I have also heard Smt.V.R.Bhonsale APP for the State / Respondent No.1. 4 The issue involved is extremely limited and narrow. 5 It is not in dispute that the flat in question came to be seized purportedly under the provisions of Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code). Two notices in that regard were received by the petitioner – one dated 14.5.2009 and another on 30.3.2011. These notices categorically referred to Section 105E(1) of the Code, as the section under which the property in question had been attached. 6 Mr.Shukla, the learned …
-
… I have also heard Smt.V.R.Bhonsale APP for the State / Respondent No.1. 4 The issue involved is extremely limited and narrow. 5 It is not in dispute that the flat in question came to be seized purportedly under the provisions of Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code). Two notices in that regard were received by the petitioner – one dated 14.5.2009 and another on 30.3.2011. These notices categorically referred to Section 105E(1) of the Code, as the section under which the property in question had been attached. 6 Mr.Shukla, the learned …
Questions about Section 105E
What have the courts held on Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Ketan Ramanlal Doshi vs The State of Maharashtra (11 Nov 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Cited by the State for sealing the premises; Court held this provision is inapplicable as it pertains to reciprocal international arrangements for attachment and forfeiture, not domestic criminal cases. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2018 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 105E 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 105E, section 105E CRPC, section 105E 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 Ketan Ramanlal Doshi vs The State of Maharashtra (11 Nov 2019).
What should I read with Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 105D (Identifying unlawfully acquired property), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 117 (Seizure or attachment of property), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 105E of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 105E, 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.