Mudili Balakrishna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3960 AP

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5574 of 2021

ORDER:-

This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is filed challenging

the order passed under Section 457 Cr.P.C by the trial Court

refusing to grant of interim custody of the tobacco products that

were seized in connection with a case registered under Sections

34(a), 34(1)(i) of the A.P. Excise Act and under Sections 272, 273,

188 IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that

since the petitioner is challenging the order passed by the trial

Court under Section 457 Cr.P.C relating to interim custody of the

property that the present Criminal Petition under Section 482

Cr.P.C is not maintainable, as the said order is amenable to

revisional jurisdiction under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C. Therefore, he

would pray for dismissal of this Criminal Petition as not

maintainable.

As rightly contended by learned Additional Public

Prosecutor, it is now well settled law that an order passed by the

trial Court either under Section 451 Cr.P.C or under Section 457

Cr.P.C relating to interim custody of the property that was claimed,

the said order is amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section

397 Cr.P.C. Therefore, when a specific remedy is available to

challenge the said order by way of preferring a revision under

Section 397(1) Cr.P.C, it is settled law that the petitioner cannot

invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The contention of the petitioner that when the impugned order is

ex facie illegal on the face of it that the Court can interfere under

Section 482 Cr.P.C, cannot be countenanced. Even on the said

contention that impugned order is ex facie illegal on the face of it,

he can challenge the said order under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C.

In fact, this Court in Criminal Petition No.2710 of 2021 by

its order dated 09.07.2021 clearly held that an order passed

relating to interim custody of the property by the trial Court is

amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C

after referring various judgments rendered on the issue earlier by

the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh and other High

Courts. This Court also clearly held in the said order that when a

specific remedy is available under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C to

challenge the said order that the petitioner cannot invoke the

inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. To the same effect,

another order in Criminal Petition No.1745 of 2021 is passed by

this Court and also in Criminal Petition No.4196 of 2021. So, in

view of the aforesaid earlier orders of this Court, this Criminal

Petition is not maintainable.

Therefore, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as not

maintainable. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the

impugned order under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C before the appropriate

Court.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Criminal

Petition, shall stand closed.

______________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

Date: 06.10.2021 AKN

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5574 of 2021

Date: 06-10-2021

AKN