Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: 457 criminal procedure code in Sri Adimulam Mohan vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 16 February, 2024Matching Fragments
This criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC is filed challenging the order, dated 01.02.2024, dismissing the petition in Crl.M.P.No.23 of 2024 in Crime No.6/RCA-CIU/2016 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for trial of SPE & ACB cases, Rajamahendravaram, filed by the petitioner/accused officer under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC for interim custody of the gold articles.
2. Heard Sri Venkat Chalasani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. A. Gayatri Reddy, learned Standing Counsel-cum-Special Public Prosecutor for ACB Cases appearing for the respondents/ State.
BSB, J
11. The learned standing counsel for the respondents submitted that so long as the order of attachment passed by the trial Court is in force by virtue of Sections 4 & 13 of the Ordinance Act, 1944, the petitioner cannot seek the relief.
12. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner is not seeking the relief of raising the attachment or release of property, the provisions of the Ordinance Act, 1944 have no bar to entertain the petition under the provisions of CrPC for interim custody under Section 451 & 457 CrPC.
13. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this High Court in The State Vs. Syed Belquis Sultana 4 . In that case, the standing counsel for ACB contended that the Court has no jurisdiction to return the property under Section 457 CrPC and that there exists no provision enabling return of the property. After dealing with the provisions under Sections 451, 452 and 457 CrPC and the decision of the Supreme Court, this High Court held at paras 6, 7 & 8 as follows:
14. A perusal of the decision indicates that while disagreeing with the order passed by the trial Court granting interim custody under Section 457 CrPC and further finding that Section 451 or 457 CrPC cannot be invoked at the stage of investigation in view of production of the seized property in Court, only considering the fact situation in that case to resolve the impasse, this Court suspended the order impugned before the High Court.
15. The learned counsel further placed reliance on the decision of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in K. Somasekhar Reddy and others Vs. The State 5.