\n– Statement 1: Section 102(1) of CrPC allows any police officer to seize any property found under circumstances that create suspicion of the commission of any offence. Unlawfully acquired property is property acquired through the commission of an offence (e.g., corruption, fraud). Therefore, a police officer can seize such property. The condition about the rank of Sub-Inspector might be based on specific police rules or state amendments, or simply indicative of the level of investigation where such property is typically identified. Assuming this specific context is valid for the question, the core power to seize suspected property exists. The reason for belief about concealment or transfer is a valid ground for exercising seizure power.
\n– Statement 2: CrPC does not contain a general provision requiring an order of seizure made by a police officer under Section 102 to be confirmed by a court within thirty days to have effect. A police officer seizing property under Section 102 must report the seizure to the Magistrate (Section 102(3)). The Magistrate then takes appropriate action regarding custody and disposal (Sections 451-457). This requirement for court confirmation within a specific timeframe is found in special laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for attachment of property, but not as a general rule for seizures under CrPC Section 102.
\n<\/section>\n