Cash was seized from assessee and his companion while travelling, and was produced before Magistrate as they failed to explain its source. Assessee’s request for interim custody was denied, and amount was released to Income Tax Department. Petition under Section 452 CrPC was also rejected. Assessee challenged Magistrate’s order in revision petition and by relying on decision of Kerala High Court in Ravirajan R. v. State of Kerala [2023 (6) KHC SN 23/[2023] 155 taxmann.com 670 (Ker.)(HC) and  contended that Income Tax Department couldnot claim custody of money under section 132A when it was in possession of a criminal court and that a Magistrate couldnot compel Revenue to complete assessment within a prescribed timeframe under Section 451 CrPC.High Court held that there was no reason to deviate from view taken by this Court in Ravirajan R. (supra) and accordingly, order was  set aside. High Court directed amount would be released to assessee upon execution of a bond to repay/redeposit it if directed, and furnishing a bank guarantee from a Nationalised or Scheduled Bank for same amount and Department would complete assessment as per law. On SLP the Court held that   order passed by High Court directing release of cash seized from vehicle of assessee for reason that High Court had already provided that seized property would be released only upon furnishing bank guarantee(s) and personal bond(s) and once amount was secured, there was no reason to interfere with  order. Order of High Court affirmed.