1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 390 of 2025 Reserved on : 19.6.2025 Decided on : 18.9.2025 Keshavamurthy Chintala …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & anr. …Respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ____________________________________________________ For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondent :Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. Virender Singh, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.) seeking the following reliefs: “A. Impugned order dated 22.8.2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (I) Dharamshala in Cr. M.A. No. 712/2024, titled as, ‘Keshavamurty Chintala Vs. State of H.P.” may be modified to the 2 extent so as to ensure the immediate release of the remaining defrauded amount of Rs.59,71,333/- to the petitioner. B. Direct respondent No. 2 and relevant authorities to conduct proper investigation, expedite the tracing of the remaining defrauded amount and ensure its prompt release to the petitioner.” 2. By way of order dated 22.8.2024, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (I) Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’), while deciding the application, moved by the petitioner has partly allowed the application for release of the amount of Rs. 63,83,196/-. 3. The petitioner had lodged the case FIR No. 21 of 2024, dated 21.6.2024 with the Cyber Crime Police Station, Northern Range at Dharamshala, under Section 420 IPC, alleging that the fraudsters, through deceit and false threats of prosecution, have coerced the petitioner to transfer a sum of Rs. 64,73,106/-, through 37 transactions to various bank accounts, under the pretext of “verification” of his accounts. 3 4. When, the petitioner realized the fact that the aforesaid transactions were fraudulent, he had lodged the FIR in question. During investigation, the Police froze several bank accounts, linked to the fraudulent transactions. 5. It is the further stand of the petitioner that thereafter, the petitioner has moved Cr. M.A. No. 712/2024, titled as, ‘Keshavamurty Chintala Vs. State of H.P.’, before the learned trial Court, with a prayer to release the amount traced and frozen by the police authorities. The copy of the said application has been annexed with the petition, as Annexure P-2. 6. As per the documents annexed with the application, as well as, from the perusal of order dated 22.8.2024, it has been proved that the learned trial Court has ordered the release of amount of Rs. 14,10,107.2/-, in favour of the petitioner, on Spurdari, subject to furnishing Spurdari nama, in the sum of Rs. 14,11,000/-, alongwith one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court. The said 4 order has been passed on the basis of no objection, made by the Police. 7. As per order dated 22.8.2024, release orders were issued by the learned trial Court, however, banks have sent various communications giving respective reasons for non-compliance of the orders passed by the learned trial Court. In this regard, petitioner has also annexed the printouts of e- mail, received from the banks. 8. In such situation, learned counsel for the petitioner could not satisfy the judicial conscience of the Court as to how this Court can interfere with the order, passed by the learned trial Court, as the petition is totally silent as to how respondent No. 2 has not conducted proper investigation. 9. Once, the order has been passed by the learned trial Court, the petitioner has to approach the said Court, for compliance of the said order, or the concerned banks, to get the amount released, but, once the trial Court has issued the release order, 5 then, no direction can be issued under Section 528 of BNSS to modify the order, passed by the learned trial Court. 10. In view of aforesaid discussions, the present petition is dismissed. The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. (Virender Singh) Judge September 18, 2025 Kalpana