Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Asileti Chandu, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 18 April, 2022
1
CMR, J.
Crl.R.C.No.263 of 2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Criminal Revision Case No.263 of 2022
Judgment:
This criminal revision case is directed against the order
dated 28-03-2022 passed in Crl.M.P. No.110 of 2022 on the file
of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Mobile) cum
III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District,
whereby the petition filed under Section 457 of Cr.P.C seeking
interim custody of the vehicle was dismissed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent/
State.
3. Respondents 2, 3 and 5 herein are the other co-accused
in crime No.119 of 2022 of Peddapadu Police Station, West
Godavari District. Therefore, they are not necessary parties and
no notice is required to be given to them in this criminal
revision case.
4. The petitioner is accused No.3 in the above crime.
A case under Sections 269, 270, 271, 273 and 278 read with
Section 34 of IPC was registered against him on the ground that
the petitioner has been carrying chicken waste in the said
vehicle. The Investigating Officer has seized the vehicle i.e. Tata
motors goods carriage vehicle bearing registration No.AP39TY-
8686 in connection with the above crime in which the said
chicken waste is being transported.
CMR, J.
Crl.R.C.No.263 of 2022
5. Thereafter, the petitioner, who is claiming to be the
owner of the said vehicle, has filed a petition seeking interim
custody of the said vehicle. The said petition came to be
dismissed by the impugned order on the sole ground that earlier
also, the petitioner is involved in similar crime and as such he
is not entitled for interim custody of the said vehicle.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
mere carrying chicken waste in the said vehicle by itself does
not amount to commission of any offence. Therefore, he would
submit that the very registration of the FIR against the
petitioner is unsustainable under law. He would further submit
that if the vehicle is left unused in the premises of the Court or
the police station that it would be damaged and thereby prayed
for grant of interim custody of the said vehicle to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioner and the facts and circumstances of
the case, the criminal revision case is allowed and the impugned
order passed by the trial Court is set aside. The trial Court is
directed to give interim custody of the said vehicle to the
petitioner on executing a self bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the
satisfaction of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First
Class (Mobile) cum III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Eluru.
The petitioner shall not alienate or transfer the ownership of the
said vehicle and he shall give an undertaking before the trial
Court by way of an Affidavit that he will produce the said
CMR, J.
Crl.R.C.No.263 of 2022
vehicle as and when directed in the trial Court till the trial of
the case is completed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
_________________________________________
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J.
Date:18-04-2022.
cs
