Molla. Jashwanth Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Molla. Jashwanth Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal petition disposed of with directions rather than outright grant/refusal: police to conduct the confession-cum-seizure panchanama, complete investigation and file charge sheet preferably within one month; thereafter petitioner to seek interim custody afresh before the trial court, which is to decide on merits in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous applications stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner (accused No.3, owner of the seized mobile phone and Mahindra Thar vehicle) should be granted interim custody of the seized property notwithstanding that investigation is pending and the confession-cum-seizure panchanama is not yet conducted — i.e., whether the trial court's dismissal of his interim-custody application should be set aside.

Court's answer

The petitioner cannot be suffered due to the lapses on the part of the prosecution (including non-conduct of the confession-cum-seizure panchanama).

Ratio / Principle

The police concerned are directed to conduct the confession-cum-seizure panchanama, complete the investigation and file the charge sheet as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one (01) month from the date of the order.

Key takeaways

After filing of the charge sheet by the police, the petitioner shall file an application before the trial court seeking interim custody of the seized property, and the trial court may then consider the same on merits in accordance with law.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Law – Interim custody of seized movable property – Petition under Section 52S of BNSS (as printed) by Molla Jashwanth (accused No.3), owner of seized property comprising a mobile phone (iPhone) 13 Pro, IMEI No.350738140632432, and a four-wheeler Mahindra Thar bearing No.TS09FT0393, seized by the Investigating Agency in Crime No.30 of 2024, challenging the order dated 02.01.2025 of the XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad dismissing his application (Crl.M.P.No.5048 of 2024) under Sections 497 and 503 of BNSS for interim custody on the ground that investigation was pending and the confession-cum-seizure panchanama was not yet conducted. Held: the petitioner cannot be suffered due to lapses on the part of the prosecution; police directed to conduct the confession-cum-seizure panchanama, complete the investigation and file the charge sheet as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one month; upon filing of the charge sheet, petitioner to apply afresh before the trial court for interim custody, to be considered on merits in accordance with law. Criminal petition disposed of accordingly; pending miscellaneous applications closed. (Juvvadi Sridevi, J.; Additional Public Prosecutor had contended accused Nos.1-3, family members, bought the Thar car with diverted victim funds registered in accused No.3's name.)

l t,

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

THURSDAY,THE^{THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FIVE}

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE^{SMT. JUSTICEJUWADISRIDEVI}

CRIMINAL PETITI ON^{NO:1139 oF 2025}

Between:

Molla Jashwanth^{S/oMolla Shivaiah}

.. . . Petitioner

AND

1 The State of^{Telangana rep- by Public Prosecutor,HighCourt for the Stateof} Telangana

2 Natrai Adla Sio Raiaqandam^Adla. Occ: Business,^{R/o SRT 914, Near Busstop,} Sinaihnagar,^{Hyderebad 5oo 018}

. . . ResPondents

PetitionunderSection52SofBNSSprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the Memorandum^{o{ Grounds of Criminal Petition'the High Court may be pleasedto} set aside/quash^{the order dated 02 01 2025 in CrIMP No 5048 of 2024 in Crime No'} 30ot2o24onthefileofthexllAdditionalChiefJudicialMagistrate,Hyderabadand directionsmaybegiventoissuetheinterimcustodyofMobilel.Phonel3Prowith lMElNo.350738140632432andFourWheelerlvlahindraTharBNo.TS09FT0393 in favour of the Petitioner-

This Petition^{comingon for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal^{Petitio'nand upon nearing the argumentsof Mr' S Viplav Simha} n"OJy, nOro"rte^{for the Fetitioner and thJ AdditionalPublicProsecutor for the} Respondent No.1^{and none appeared for the Respondent No-2}

The Court made the^{following:ORDER:}

HON'IJLI' SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.1139 of2025

ORDER:

Challenging the order, dated 02.01.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.504ii of 2024 in Crime No.30 of 2024 b1,the leamed XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad, this Criminal Petition is filed. J3y the impugned order, the appiication filed by the petitioner/acc,serr No.3 under Sections 497 and 503 of BNSS, seeLing inte.im cusrociy of seized property i.e., mobile rphone r3 pro and vehicle bearing No.TS-09-FT_0393, was dismissecl.

Fieard Sri S Viplav Simha Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Jithender l{ao veeramalla, rearned Additional Public Prosecutor appea.ing for the respondent-State and perused the record.

3' Learned co.rrser for petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of seizr-'d proper!, and during the course of investigation, the Investigating Agency has scized the same from the possession of the petitio,er. I Ie rurther subr,its that the trial cor,ft erred i, dismissing the al.rplication filecl by the petitioner, merely on the

2

,' t ...

ground that investigation is pending and the confession-cum-seizure panchanama was not yet conducted. The Police ought to have conducted seizure panchanama during the initial stage of investigation. Hence, he prayed to set aside the impugned order and allow the criminal petition.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that accused Nos.l to 3 are the family members^{and they} have purchased the seized property i.e., Thar Car, by diverling^the victim funds internally and registered the said car in the^name of petitioner/accused No.3. He further submits that the trial Court has rightly passed the impugned order and the same^{cannot be} interfered with. Hence, he^prayed to dismiss the^petition.

Having heard both sides and^{perusedthe materialon record, it} is evident that the application filed by^{the petitionerseekinginterim} custody of the seized^propefty was^{dismissedby the trial Coutl} holding that investigation 1S pending and the confession-cumseizure panchanama is not yet conducted. The^{petitioner cannotbe} suffered due to the lapses on the parl of the^{prosecution.Hence,}

ja-

3

this courl is of the consicrered view that the police concerned are directed to conduct confession-cum-seizure panchanama, comprete the investigation and file charge sheet, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, rvithin a period of one (01) month from today. After filing of charge sheet by the porice, the petitioner shall file an application before the trial court seeking interim custody of the seized property. in which event, thc same may be consiciered bv the trial Court on merits, in accorclance with law.

6 With the above clirections, this Criminal petition rs disposed of.

Pending mis,cellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

Sd/- A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 't ! sEc TION OFFICER

To,

1 The XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad

2 The Station House Officer, NSP ADMIN (DD) Police Station, Hyderabad

3 One CC to lt/lr S.Viplav Simha Reddy, Advocate (OPuC)

4 Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG) High Court for the state of Telangana lourl

5 Two CD Copies

I I l I I I i

I I

1 I I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 30.01 .2025

ORDER

-.-:...-'<br>,<br>'-.: I
:il
:) ll
31 JirN llh
o
* c Fai r'l::'.-:.. -

CRLP.No.1139 ot 2025

DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION

<br>