RAJENDRA SHANKARLAL KABARAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:38132
                                               -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.
                                    -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 14 th 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