Telangana High Court
Gangasani Alivelu vs State Of Telangana, on 10 July, 2025
1
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7325 OF 2025
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to
quash the order dated 28.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.816 of
2024 in C.C.No.6 of 1996 by the learned Special Judge for Trial of
SPE & ACB Cases at Hyderabad (for short "trial Court").
2. The facts of the prosecution case before the trial Court is
that, one late P.Krishna Reddy was the accused in C.C.No.6 of
1996 on the file of the ACB Court, based on the charge sheet filed
against him under Section 13(e) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') alleging that he was in
possession of disproportionate assets. That at the time of search
conducted by the ACB officials, some cash and documents were
seized and deposited in the Court. The accused was convicted for
the offence under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the
Act vide judgment dated 07.08.2006 and was sentenced to
rigorous imprisonment of 1 ½ years and also to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/-. Against the said conviction, the accused preferred an
appeal vide Crl.Appeal No.1071 of 2006 before this Court and
during the pendency of appeal, the accused died and this Court
has permitted his legal heirs to prosecute the appeal vide orders
in I.A.No.1 of 2023. Subsequently, on 25.07.2023 this Court has
passed the orders setting aside the conviction and sentence
passed in C.C.No.06 of 1996. Against the said judgment of
acquittal, no appeal was filed before the Apex Court.
3. The petitioner herein is the third party and she submits
that she is the owner of the property mentioned in the registered
sale deed vide document No.7256 of 1979 and that the said
document was seized by the ACB officials at the time of search
and is marked as Ex.P85 in C.C.No.06 of 1996. Thus, the
petitioner has filed an application in Crl.M.P.No.816 of 2024 in
C.C.No.06 of 1996 on the file of the trial Court praying the Court
to return the registered sale deed bearing document No.7256 of
1979 dated 10.12.1979 and the said petition was dismissed by
the trial Court. Aggrieved by the said orders, the present petition
is filed seeking to set aside the same and to release the said
document.
4. Heard the submissions of Sri P.Prabhakar Reddy, learned
counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for
the respondent.
5. The learned petitioner counsel submits that the petitioner
herein is a third party and that her document was seized during
the investigation by the police, in an offence under Section 13(1)(e)
read with Section 13(2) of the Act against one P.Krishna Reddy
and that the said case ended in acquittal in the appeal at
appellate stage. Following which they have filed Crl.M.P.No.816 of
2024 seeking return of the document which was dismissed by the
trial Court. He further submitted that the petitioner being a third
party her document is not at all relevant to the said criminal case.
However, since it has ended in acquittal and no SLP is being
preferred by the Government, the document of the petitioner may
be returned by quashing the orders passed by the trial Court.
6. The learned Standing Counsel has fairly submitted that
though the Bureau has obtained permission from the Government
seeking to file SLP, subsequently the said permission was sought
to be withdrawn and the Government has issued G.O.Rt.No.376
dated 11.06.2025 permitting to withdraw the permission to file
SLP. Therefore, the State has not preferred any SLP and that the
further action against P.Krishna Reddy/accused is abated,
therefore, they do not require the document any more in this
particular case. He further submitted that the document pertains
to the petitioner herein i.e. Gangasani Alievelu.
7. Perused the record.
8. The record discloses that C.C.No.6 of 1996 was filed against
P.Krishna Reddy for the offences under Section 13(e) r/w 13(2) of
the Act. The case ended in conviction, against which Crl.Appeal
No.1071 of 2006 was filed and during the pendency of appeal the
accused died, while so the High Court has permitted the legal
heirs of the deceased to prosecute the appeal and finally the
appeal was ended in acquittal. It is further revealed that as a part
of investigation, the police conducted search and seized certain
documents which were filed along with the charge sheet before the
trial Court. Thus, the Bureau has initially obtained permission
from the Government vide Memo No.PRRD-VENG/1/18/2023-16
to file SLP, subsequently, the Bureau has furnished information
to the Government with regard to the actual facts stating that the
AO has passed away and that eventually the SLP would get
abated. After which, the Government has abated further action
against the accused/AO duly withdrawing the permission to file
SLP vide G.O.Rt.No.376, dated 11.06.2025, thus, the State has
stopped filing SLP and it is also evident from the counter filed by
the prosecution that the document sought for by the petitioner is
not required for their prosecution. It is further revealed that the
petitioner herein is the owner of the property as per the sale deed,
which is sought by her. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, it
is opined that the document has to be released in favour of the
petitioner.
9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The order
dated 28.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.816 of 2024 in C.C.No.6 of
1996 by the learned Special Judge for Trial of SPE & ACB Cases
at Hyderabad, is hereby set aside and the trial Court is directed to
return the document bearing No.7256 of 1979 dated
10.12.1979/Ex.P85 in favour of the petitioner.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
_________________________________
JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Date: 10.07.2025
ns
