Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
K.Pavan Raju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 7 December, 2020
[3240] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI ONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY a SO :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 446 OF 2020 Between: Sri K.Pavan Raju, S/o Kasulu, Door No. 20-13-7/1, Palla Dora Peta Community Hall Beach Road, Visakhapatnam-530001 Petitioner AND . 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P At Amaravath through SHO, Butchayyapeta P. 8, Visakhapatnam District. 2. Chinthapalli Srinivas, S/o. Gurayya, aged about 34 years, Kothajalaripeta, House No. 16- 22-7/1, Visakhapatnam-530001. 3. Bejjanki Sai Ganesh, S/o. Rambabu Aged about 23 years R/o. IH.No.4-34, Kodiguna Ramasingavararn Village, Peddavegi Mandal, West Godavari District-A2 4. Bejjanki Kishore, S/o Rambabu, aged about 19 years R/o.H.No.4-34, Kondiguna Ramasingavaram Village, Peddavegi Mandal, West Godavari District-A3 Respondents . Revision filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the Orders dt. 22.10.2020 in Crl.M.P. No. 180 of 2020 passed by Metropolitan Sessions Judge-Cum-IAdditional district & Session Judge, Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Vizianagaram for the following among other. IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 482 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pass orders for the interim custody of two wheeler Vehicle bearing Registration No. AP.39E3784 in favour of the petitioner seized in pursuant to the Cr.No. 180/2020 on the file of the S.Kota Police Station, Vizianagaram, pending disposal of CRLRC 446 of 2020, on the file of the High Court. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP, and the Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.446 of 2020 JUDGMENT:
Assailing the order, dated 22.10.2020, in Crl.M.P.No.399 of 2020 passed by learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram, in connection with crime No.180 of 2020 of S.Kota Police Station, Vizianagaram, dismissing the said petition filed by the petitioner herein under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. for grant of interim custody of his vehicle bearing registration No.AP 39 E 3784 this criminal revision case has been filed.
2. Heard Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Court below has dismissed the petition filed under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C merely on the ground that the petitioner did not mention as to how the vehicle was found in the custody of the accused/respondent No.2 to 4 herein and observing that the vehicle was used for transportation of Ganja and as the investigation is still pending, the petitioner is not entitled for interim custody of the seized vehicle during the pendency of the case. Learned counsel would further submit that the Court below has failed to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 457 Cr.P.C though there is no dispute about the ownership of the seized vehicle. Learned counsel would also submit that just because the investigation is pending, that cannot be a ground to refuse the petition filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C.
ty LK,J 2 Cri.R.C.No.446 of 2020
4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State would submit that the Court below has rightly dismissed the petition filed under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. while taking proper view of the matter.
5. Here, it is apt to extract Section 457 Cr.P.C., which reads thus:
457. Procedure by police upon seizure of property.
(1) Whenever the seizure of property by any police officer is reported to a Magistrate under the Provisions of this Code, and such property is not produced before a Criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, the Magistrate may make such order as he thinks fit respecting the disposal of such property or the delivery of such property to the person entitled to the possession thereof, or if such person cannot be ascertained, respecting the custody and production of such property.
(2) If the person so entitled is known, the Magistrate may order the property to be delivered to him on such conditions (if any) as the Magistrate thinks fit and if such person is unknown, the Magistrate may detain it and shall, in such case, issue a proclamation specifying the articles of which such Property consists, and requiring any person who may have a claim thereto, to appear before him and establish his claim within six months from the date of such proclamation.
6. As per Section 457 of Cr.P.C., if the person is known and when there is no dispute about the ownership of the seized vehicle, the Magistrate may order property to be delivered to him on such conditions as the Magistrate thinks fit. In this case, just because the case is pending, that cannot be a ground to dismiss the petition filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. In the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly, in view of the provision under Section 457 Cr.P.C., this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled for interim custody of the seized vehicle.
To, LK,J 3 Cri.R.C.No.446 of 2020
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the order passed by learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram, in Cri.M.P.No.399 of 2020, dated 22.10.2020, is set aside. Interim custody of the vehicle bearing registration No.AP 39 E 3784 shall be given to the petitioner on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) with one surety for a likesum to the satisfaction of learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
Sd/- V. SAVITHRAMMA ASSISTAN REGISTRAR PTS ov ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /[TRUE COPY// The Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, - Special Judge, for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act Vizianagaram.
The Station House Officer, Butchayyapeta P. S, Visakhapatnam District. (by RPAD) Sri Chinthapalli Srinivas, S/o. Gurayya, Kothajalaripeta, House No. 16-22-7/1, Visakhapatnam-530001. (by RPAD) Sri Bejjanki Sai Ganesh, S/o.Rambabu R/o. IH.No.4-34, Kodiguna Ramasingavaramn Village, Peddavegi Mandal, West Godavari District-A2 (by RPAD) Sri Bejjanki Kishore, S/o Rambabu, R/o.H.No.4-34, Kondiguna Ramasingavaram Village, Peddavegi Mandal, West Godavari District-A3 (by RPAD) One CC to Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati. [OPUC] One spare copy \ HIGH COURT LKJ DATED:07/12/2020 ORDER CRLRC.NO.446 OF 2020 DIRECTION