Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010075032025 2025:GAU-AS:4470 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1995/2025 BABASHAHAB DR B R AMBEDKAR SOCIETY A SOCIETY REGD. UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1860, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GIAS UDDIN LASKAR, AGED 59 YRS, S/O- LATE BASIR UDDIN LASKAR , VILL- NIANAGAR PART II, P.A AND DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, HOMW DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ULUBARI GUWAHATI-07 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HOJAI ASSA HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782435 4:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE HOJAI P.S ASSAM PIN-78243 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A H M R CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 09.04.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. H. M. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate, Assam representing the State respondents. 2. The petitioner is a society/NGO registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 with the aim and object to provide social services in the field of education. The Govt of India, Ministry of Women Development adopted “National Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) Policy” to reiterate the commitment to promote inclusive, equitable and contextualized opportunities for promoting optimal development and active learning capacity of all children below six years of age. The petitioner as a service provider conducts 10 days induction training programme under the aforesaid policy. 3. On 24.09.2024, an FIR being Hojai P.S. Case No. 286/2024 was lodged against the petitioner with the allegation of taking money from youth with false promise of providing job. In connection with the said FIR, the police seized some documents from the office of the petitioner and sealed the offices of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.03.2025 before the respondent No. 3 with a request to unseal the office premises as it’s all the other documents are lying in the office but no action has been taken till today. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in connection with the said FIR, the police immediately raided the petitioner’s both Zonal Office at Hojai and Head Office at Hailakandi and the police not only seized all the relevant documents but also sealed both the offices on 24.09.2024 and 27.09.2024 Page No.# 3/3 respectively and since then, both the offices of the petitioner are under the seal of the police. 5. In the case of Nevada Properties Private Limited –Vs- State of Maharashtra and Another reported in (2019) 20 SCC 119, the Hon’ble Apex Court dealing with a similar issue while answering a reference whether the expression “any property used in Sub-Section 1 of Section 102 of Cr.P.C., includes immovable property, after dealing with different previous judgments and provisions of Cr.P.C, at paragraph 34 answered the reference holding that the power of police officer under Section 102 of the code to seize any property, which may be found under circumstances that create suspicion of the commission of offence, would not include the power to attach, seize and seal an immovable property. 6. In view of the settled aforesaid propositions of law and in the factual backdrop of the present case as discussed hereinabove, in the considered opinion of this Court, the writ petition is required to be allowed to the extent directing the authorities to de-seal the immovable property as recoded at paragraph 4 of this order which were sealed in connection with Hojai P.S. Case No. 286/2024 forthwith. The authorities shall be at liberty to seize the other document and any other materials/property except the immovable property as recoded hereinabove. 7. This disposes the writ petition. JUDGE Comparing Assistant