Allowed

Mulakalapalli Leela Prasad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC1 Oct 2015CRLRC/1959/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this revision under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC, the High Court granted interim custody of a vehicle involved in a crime to the petitioner-owner, conditioned on a bond and production of the RC book, without affecting potential future confiscation.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Revision Case allowed; Vehicle released for interim custody of petitioner on execution of bond and production of RC book.

Mulakalapalli Leela Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶2

Criminal Revision Case No.1959 of 2015

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner filed this Criminal Revision Case by invoking the provisions under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code being aggrieved by the order dated 29-05-2014 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1321 of 2014 in C.C.No.504 of 2015 (Crime No.86 of 2014 of Chandarlapadu Police Station) by the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandigama, Krishna District.

¶5

Heard.

¶6

When the petitioner approached the Court below for interim custody of the vehicle bearing registration No.AP 07 TA 8792 (Tata Ace), the Court below dismissed the application. Challenging the same, the present revision has been preferred.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. Further, if the vehicle is kept idle for a long period there is every possibility of it getting damaged. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready to produce the vehicle as and when required by the Court.

¶8

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor objected for grant of interim custody submitting that the vehicle is involved in a crime.

¶9

Considering the circumstances of the case, it is directed that vehicle bearing registration No.AP 07 TA 8792 (Tata Ace) shall be released for interim custody of the petitioner, subject to final orders to be passed at the time of disposal of main case, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like sum and also on production of original R.C. book. It is further directed that the petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle, shall not change the physical features of the same till the

¶10

disposal of the criminal case and further he shall undertake to produce the vehicle as and when required by the Court. However, it is made clear that the present order will not stand in the way of confiscation proceedings, if any.

¶11

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions pending in this revision, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶13

01^st October, 2015.

¶14

skmr

Mulakalapalli Leela Prasad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mulakalapalli Leela Prasad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C. Sudhakar Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Kalthireddy Subrahmanyam Vs The State of a.P.,rep.,Pp

A.Venugopal Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chidere Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Chedire Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Karnati Srinivasulu Vs The State of Telangana