-1- 901-WP-771-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 771 OF 2026 RAJENDRA SHANKARLAL KABARA VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Ramankumar Gopal Dodiya APP for Respondent - State : Mr. K. K. Naik ..... CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATED : 20th AUGUST 2026 PER COURT : 1. The present Criminal Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, who was accused No.2 in connection with Crime No. 3091 of 2016 registered with MIDC Police Station, Jalgaon, which ultimately culminated into Special ACB Case No. 09 of 2017 before the learned Special Judge, Jalgaon, under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 2. During the investigation, search and seizure was conducted by the investigating agency and gold and silver ornaments and few other articles lying in the back locker were seized. The petitioner was subjected to a full-fledged trial and upon conclusion of the trial, petitioner came to be acquitted by judgment and order dated 25th March, 2019 passed by the learned Special Court in Special ACB Case No. 09 of 2017. 2026:BHC-AUG:38132 -2- 901-WP-771-2026 3. The record indicates that the order of acquittal was challenged by the State by filing Criminal Appeal No. 543 of 2022, and the said appeal was finally heard on 13th August, 2026. This Court, by its judgment and order dated 14th August, 2026, dismissed the said appeal. 4. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, though the prosecution case against the present petitioner ultimately resulted in his acquittal, still the learned Trial Court, while acquitting the petitioner, did not pass any order pertaining to release of the articles seized during the investigation. He referred to the judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court and also to the judgment passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 543 of 2022. Perusal of both the orders admittedly does not deal with the articles that were seized during the investigation and therefore, the learned Advocate’s argument that the seized articles will have to be released by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 5. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the prosecution agency has filed a detailed affidavit in which they have fairly accepted that the allegations pertaining to disproportionate assets against the petitioner have been duly closed by the competent authority and there is no disproportionate -3- 901-WP-771-2026 assets having been established against the present petitioner. It has further been fairly stated in the affidavit that respondent No.3 in present petition has no objection, if this Court is pleased to order the release and return of the seized gold ornaments, silver ornaments, cash, articles, documents, and the key as well as consequential release of Locker No.68 maintained with Jalgaon People's Co-operative Bank Limited, Ring Road Branch, Jalgaon, upon such terms and conditions. 6. The learned Advocate for the petitioner then argues that, though no objection has been granted by the prosecution agency to return of the property that has been seized during the investigation, yet said no objection is conditional, stating that the Court is required to put proper conditions while releasing the same during the pendency of the appeal. He argues that, now that the appeal has been been dismissed, such condition is unwarranted. 7. The learned APP, however, submits that the appeal period is still available to the prosecution agency and, if the prosecution intends to file an appeal against the judgment and order passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 543 of 2022, appropriate conditions be imposed. 8. I have perused the judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court as well as the judgment and order passed by -4- 901-WP-771-2026 this Court on 14th August, 2026. 9. The prosecution that was lodged against the present petitioner was under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. While investigating these offence, search and seizure was conducted in accordance with law. During the said process, the above referred articles were recovered from the present petitioner and came to be seized. 10. The reference which has been made by the prosecution in its affidavit pertains to the closure of an open inquiry concerning the alleged disproportionate assets of the petitioner by the competent authority and it has been specifically stated that no case of disproportionate assets has been established against the present petitioner. 11. In light of the above both the factors that the prosecution itself resulted in the acquittal of the present petitioner and the subsequent statutory appeal has also been dismissed along with the fact that the open inquiry pertaining to disproportionate assets of the petitioner has also been closed by the competent authority, I do not find any necessity of imposing any further conditions upon the use and enjoyment of the properties that has been seized by the prosecution. -5- 901-WP-771-2026 12. Taking into consideration the no objection of the prosecution agency and also the fact that the open inquiry conducted against the present petitioner has now been closed along with the acquittal in the prosecution case, the present petition deserves to be allowed and the articles mentioned in paragraph 12 of the affidavit of the prosecution deserve to be released to the present petitioner. 13. The Criminal Writ Petition stands allowed in terms of prayer Clauses (C), (D) and (E). 14. Respondent No.3 is hereby directed to release all the articles which are mentioned in prayer Clause (C), (D) and (E) to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. 15. In addition to the return of articles, respondent No.3 shall also communicate to Jalgaon People's Co-operative Bank, Ring Road Branch, Jalgaon, to release the petitioner's locker forthwith. No further orders as to costs. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR) JUDGE Tandale