IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION No.3573 of 2023 Between: Medapati Sambi Reddy, S/o. M.V.V.Satyanarayana Reddy, Hindu, aged 37 years, R/o. Machavaram Village, Rayavaram Village, East Godavari District. ...Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP, Amaravathi Rep. Indrapalem Police Station, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 2. Karri Bhami Reddy, S/o. Satyanarayana Reddy, Hindu, aged 38 Pulagurtha Village. Anaparthi Mandal, East Godavari District. 3. Karri Ammireddy, S/o. Satyanarayana Reddy, Hindu, aged 33 Pulagurtha Village, Anaparthi Mandal, East Godavari District. 4. Murthineedi Ramakrishna, S/o. Reddaiah, Hindu, aged 55 years, D.No. 3-50, Narasapurapupeta, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. years years. % If 5. Namala Sankara Prasad, S/o. NSN Murfhy, Hindu, aged 38 years. Reserve Sub-Inspector of Police, R/o P.Agraharam Village, Thondangi Mandal. ?■ 6. Revu Prasad Babu S/o. Dhana Raj Paul I > Police Constable (PC.NO.2844), aged 38 years, Reserve Police Line, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 7. China Parasuram Reddy, S/o. Appa Rao, Hindu, Police Constable PC.977, D.No.23-5-6, Avasalavari Street, Near Balaji Cheruvu Kakinada, East Godavari District. 8. Kolli Hanuman Gangadhar, S/o. Satyanarayana, Hindu Police Constable PC.3797, D.No.6-21, Mallepalli Village, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari District. ...Respondents Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to set-aside Orders dated 30-09-2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.829 of 2020 in CC.No.975 of 2019, on the file of The Court of the V Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kakinada, by allowing the CRLMP.No.829 of 2020. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P Rajesh Babu, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondent Nos.2 to 8. on The Court made the following: 4 APHC010239152023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3573/2023 Between: Medapati Sambi Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.PRAJESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to set-aside orders dated 30.09.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.829 of 2020 in C.C.No.975 of 2019 on the file of the V Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kakinada. 2. Heard Sri P.Rajesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner filed the application U/s.451 of Cr.P.C. for return of the cash seized by Police during the investigation of the case from the petitioner/accused . He would further submit that no counter claim was made by anyone on the seized cash belongs to the petitioner/accused. Petitioner is would ready to furnish security for return of the cash. He would further submit that the learned Magistrate did not consider the application in the light of guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State ofGujarat\ and therefore, the order of the learned Magistrate is not sustainable in law. 4. Considering the above facts and circumstances and in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, regarding return of the property seized during the investigation for interim custody, this Court is of the opinion that the matter be remitted to the learned Magistrate to consider the application afresh, and to pass orders on hearing both sides by following guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the above judgment. 5. In that view of the matter, the order dated 30.09.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.829 of 2020 in C.C.No.975 of 2019 by the learned V Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kakinada, is hereby set aside, and the matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to consider afresh by hearing both sides in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunder Bhai Ambalal ^ 2002 Supp (3) SCR 39 3 Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, preferably within ten (10) days, from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 6. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 2. The Station House Officer, Indrapalem Police Station, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi [OUT] 4. One CC to Sri P Rajesh Babu, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Three CD Copies To TK sree HIGH COURT DATED:13/02/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.3573 of 2023 2 8 FEB 2025 m C9. 5' . Current Section DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION