- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35795 CRL.P No. 6529 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6529 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MR. OSHIN ANTONY JOY SON OF M.A.JOY AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESIDING AT MANJUKKARAN HOUSE, VALLAPPADY, PERAMBRAKODAKARA, THISSUR, KERALA - 680 689. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANKAR H.S, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KEMPEGOWDANAGARA POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2024 PASSED IN CRIME NO.23/2024 BY THE LEARNED XXIV ADDL.CMM COURT, BENGALURU AND ORDER DATED 13.01.2025 PASSED IN CRL.RP.594/2024 BY THE LEARNED XXXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS) (CCH-35). Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35795 CRL.P No. 6529 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by accused No.2 assailing the current orders of the courts below, wherein the courts declined to defreeze the petitioner's bank account relating to an offence reported in Crime No.23/2024 for the offence punishable under sections 8(c), 23(a), 20(ii)(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the averments urged in the petition, has strenuously contended that the Investigating Officer has proceeded to freeze the petitioner’s bank account in blatant disregard of the law declared by this Court in W.P. No.14764/2023. Placing reliance on the said judgment, it is urged that Section 68F of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the Act”) lays down an explicit statutory procedure governing seizure or freezing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35795 CRL.P No. 6529 of 2025 of assets. The provision mandates that whenever such seizure or freezing is effected, the officer concerned must forthwith communicate the same to the competent authority within forty-eight hours, and such action must be confirmed by the competent authority within thirty days. It is contended that neither of these statutory requirements has been complied with in the case on hand, rendering the freezing of the petitioner’s bank account wholly illegal. 3. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader, while attempting to justify the action of the Investigating Officer submits that the law laid down by the coordinate Bench in the aforesaid decision has been duly acted upon by the State Government. A standing order has now been issued to all concerned authorities, prescribing a uniform procedure in strict conformity with Section 68F of the Act. The said submission and the issuance of the standing order are taken on record. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35795 CRL.P No. 6529 of 2025 4. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the freezing of the petitioner’s bank account, without adherence to the mandatory safeguards contemplated under Section 68F of the Act and without following the binding directions of the coordinate Bench, is prima facie unsustainable. Consequently, the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below cannot be allowed to stand and are liable to be set aside. 5. For the foregoing reasons, the following: ORDER i. The criminal petition is allowed; ii. The order dated 23.11.2024 passed in Crime No.23/2024 by the learned XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and the order dated 13.01.2025 passed in Crl.R.P.No.594/2024 by the learned XXXIV - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35795 CRL.P No. 6529 of 2025 Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, are hereby quashed and set aside; iii. Consequently, the application filed by the petitioner under Sections 451 and 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking defreezing of his bank account, stands allowed. The bank account of the petitioner bearing No.40454948700 shall accordingly be defreezed forthwith; iv. It is, however, made clear that the quashing of the impugned orders at the hands of this Court shall not preclude respondent No.1 or the competent authority from initiating fresh proceedings, if so warranted, in strict compliance with law. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK/CT: BHK