Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
State Of Andhra Pradesh, Acb vs Shaik Hussain And Another on 13 December, 2019
Author: G. Shyam Prasad
Bench: G. Shyam Prasad
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. SHYAM PRASAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2814 OF 2018
JUDGMENT:
This Appeal is preferred challenging the impugned order, dated 14.06.2018, passed in Crl.M.P.No.507 of 2018 by the learned Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases-cum-III Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, raising the attachment for item No.2 described in annexure-VI of Crl.M.P.No.1029/2016 in Crime No.3/RCA-ACB-VSP/2016 of ACB, Visakhapatnam range, on the file of this Court.
2. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the second respondent/ petitioner/3rd party.
3. The counsel for the appellant mainly argued that as per Section 4(4) of Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance Act, 1944, to raise order of attachment for item No.2 of Annexure-II referred above, certain procedure has to be followed, which is not followed by the trial Court, while raising the attachment. The learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on Sections 4 and 5 of Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance Act, 1944.
2
4. The learned counsel for the second respondent submits that she is ready to furnish security for the ornaments released to her and abide by the conditions, if any, imposed by the Court.
5. On considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the order passed by the learned Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases-cum-III Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, it is obvious that the attachment sought to be raised in respect of gold and silver articles which have been seized under the cover of inventory report, for the purpose of further investigation, and which were kept in the custody of Anti Corruption Bureau(ACB). The purpose of raising an attachment of gold ornaments was, for use of those ornaments for the marriage of her brother which was scheduled to be performed on 20.06.2018. The trial Court considering the facts of the case, has felt that if the attachment is raised and ornaments are returned to the petitioner on furnishing some security, no prejudice would be caused to the case of prosecution, and that no useful purpose would be served by keeping ornaments in the custody of ACB. 3
6. In the light of the observations made by the trial Court and in the light of the submissions made by the counsel for second respondent that they are ready to furnish the security to the satisfaction of the Court below, I do not see any illegality in the order passed by the learned Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases-cum-III Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam.
7. In the light of the above facts, I do not see any merits in this Criminal Appeal, except directing the second respondent to furnish sufficient security to the satisfaction of the Court below for release of the ornaments, on such terms and conditions, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases-cum-III Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, as usual, while returning gold ornaments during investigation and trial .
8. With the above observations, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, in the Criminal Appeal, shall stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD Dt.13.12.2019 Bl 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2814 OF 2018 Date: 13.12.2019 BL