HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Criminal Revision Case No.3 of 2014 Date:22-01-2014 Between:
Barre Ravi Kiran ….Petitioner And The State, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad …Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Criminal Revision Case No.3 of 2014 ORDER:
This criminal revision case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. aggrieved by the order dated 20.11.2013 passed in Crl.M.P.No.4842 of 2013 in Crime No.85 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Razole, East Godavari District.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
The petitioner is accused in Crime No.85 of 2013 of Sakhinetipalli Police Station registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 376 and 506 of IPC. The petitioner filed an application before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Razole under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. seeking interim custody of the motorcycle bearing No.A_37BF3007. The said vehicle was seized while it was kept by the petitioner in front of the house of the de facto complainant under observation report. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petition on the ground that if the petitioner fails to produce the motorcycle, it would cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution in the course of trial. The view taken by the learned Magistrate is erroneous. Since the vehicle is seized under a cover of observation report of the scene of offence, the evidence can be let in by the prosecution basing on the said observation report and the trial can be proceeded with without the production of the motorcycle. If the motorcycle is kept idle for a long time, it would be damaged. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Magistrate is liable to be set aside.
Consequently, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is set aside. The motorcycle bearing No.A_37BF3007 is ordered to be released to the interim custody of the petitioner on the following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousands only) with one surety to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate;
ii) The petitioner shall produce the documents relating to the ownership of the vehicle to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.
iii) The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking before the learned Magistrate to the effect that he would produce the vehicle for the purpose of trial as and when required by the trial Court.
The criminal revision case is allowed accordingly.
R.KANTHA RAO,J Date:22.01.2014 ccm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Criminal Revision Case No.3 of 2014 Date:22-01-2014