Allowed

Pragallapati Satyanarayana Murthy v. State of Ap.

Telangana HC1 Feb 2016CRLRC/3317/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Single Judge allowed a criminal revision to grant interim custody of a lorry involved in a crime to the petitioner-owner, subject to a personal bond and condition not to alter the vehicle or prevent confiscation proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directed to release lorry No.AP 37 Y 6606 for interim custody subject to personal bond of Rs.1,50,000/- with one surety, production of RC book, undertaking not to alienate/alter and to produce when re

Pragallapati Satyanarayana Murthy Vs State of Ap. — Telangana HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶2

Criminal Revision Case No.3317 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 13-10-2015 in Crl.M.P.No.3562 of 2015 in Crime No.146 of 2015 on the file of the VI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, wherein and whereby the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner invoking the provisions under Section 451 Cr.P.C. seeking to release the vehicle i.e., lorry bearing No.AP 37 Y 6606 for the interim custody of the petitioner.

¶5

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.

¶6

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

¶7

Considering the circumstances of the case, it is

¶8

directed that the vehicle i.e., lorry bearing No.AP 37 Y 6606 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 Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court 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 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, already passed. Further, this order does not preclude the authorities from passing any confiscation proceedings.

¶9

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions pending in this revision, if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

_______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶12

01^st February, 2016 skmr

Pragallapati Satyanarayana Murthy v. State of Ap.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pragallapati Satyanarayana Murthy v. State of Ap.

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

Dhugyala Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Abdul Zoheb Vs The State of Telangana

Vittal Datta hari Das Vs The State of Telangana

Kota Rama Devi Vs Cherukuru Sulochana

Somavaram Srinath Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Kommata Kishan and 2 Others Vs the State of Telangana