% APHC010303202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI \\ IfO foS '4 MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE v'’V> * ' SS^' -A PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 682 OF 2025 Revision filed under Sections 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C., aggrieved by the order dated 02-09-2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1259 of 2024 in Crime No.63 of 2023 by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur. Between: 1. R L Nagarathnamma, W/o. late P.Raja Reddy, age about 54 years, Occ: Working as MPHA(F), Primary Health Centre, Cherukuvaripalli , R/o D.No.4-264/1, College Road, VRR Theater, Sodum, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner/Petitioner/Owner of the Vehicle AND 1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, through P.S. Vadamalapeta. ...Respondent/State 2. Polasani Gowri Gnana Prakash Reddy @ Chintu, S/o P.Raja Reddy, age about 25 years, R/o Yerrathivaripalli Village, Sodum Chittoor District. Mandal, 3. Sannappareddy Vasudeva Reddy, S/o. S.Mohan Reddy, age about 53 years, R/o. Basaveswar Nagar, Bangalore. 4. Chittoor Subramanyam, S/o C.Mohan, age about 53 years, R/o Thadakara Colony, Thavanampaili, Chittoor District. 5. Thadakara Chandraiah, S/o T.Venkataiah, age about 64 years, R/o Thadakara Colony, Thavanampalli Village, Chittoor District. 6. Kalikiri Yalla Reddy, S/o K.Bhaskar Reddy, age about 40 years, R/o Yerrathivaripalli Village, Sodum Mandal, Chittoor District. 7. Medina Rangaiah, S/o late M. Manjunadham, age about 36 years, R/o Yerrathivaripalli Village, Sodum Mandal, Chittoor District. 8. Boorsu Suneel Kumar, S/o Vijaya Kumar, age about 26 years, R/o Nadigadda, Sodum Mandal, Chittoor District. 9. Ayyamgaru Kireeti Krishna, S/o I.Suresh Kumar, age about 27 years, R/o Kendali Nagar, M.R.Palli, Tirupati, Tirupati District. lO.Madasi Sudarshan, S/o Subramanyam, age about 31 years, R/o Seshapuram Village and Post, Chandragiri Mandal, D.N0.3-1/A Tirupati District. ll.C.Sai Santhosh @ Sai, S/o late C.Ravichandra, age about 22 years, R/o D.No.4-159, M.R.Palli, Tirupati, Tirupati District. 12. Medina Anji, S/o late M.Manjunadham, age about 28 years, R/o Yerrathivaripalli, ST Colony, Sodum Mandal, Chittoor District. 13. Medina Ravi, S/o late M.Manjunadham, age about 27 years, R/o Yerrathivaripalli, ST Colony, Sodum Mandal, Chittoor District. (Respondents 2 to 13 are accused not necessary parties in the present proceedings.) ...Respondents/Accused 1 to 12 Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Munakala Venkata Ramana Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Public Prosecutor Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following order: APHC010303202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 682/2025 Between; 1 R L NAGARATHNAMMA, WORKING AS MPHA(F), PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, CHERUKUVARIPALLI R/0 D.NO.4-264/1, COLLEGE ROAD, VRR THEATER, SODUM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. 2. POLASANI GOWRI GNANA PRAKASH REDDY @ CHINTU, S/0 P.RAJA REDDY, AGE ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/0 YERRATHIVARIPALLI VILLAGE, SODUM MANUAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. SANNAPPAREDDY VASUDEVA REDDY, S.MOHAN REDDY, AGE ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/0 BASAVESWAR NAGAR, BANGALORE. 4. CHITTOR SUBRAMANYAM ABOUT 53 YEARS THAVANAMPALLI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5 THADAKARA CHANDRAIAH,, S/0 T.VENKATAIAH, AGE ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/0 THADAKARA COLONY, THAVANAMPALLI VILLAGE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6 KALIKIRI YALLA REDDY, S/0 K.BHASKAR REDDY, AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/0 YERRATHIVARIPALLI VILLAGE, SODUM MANUAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 7 MEDINA RANGAIAH, S/0 LATE M. MANJUNADHAM, AGE ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/0 YERRATHIVARIPALLI VILLAGE, SODUM MANUAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 8. BOORSU SUNEEL KUMAR, S/0 VIJAYA KUMAR, AGE ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/0 NADIGADDA, SODUM MANUAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 9 AYYAMGARU KIREETI KRISHNA, S/O I.SURESH KUMAR, AGE ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/0 KENDALI NAGAR, M.R.PALLI, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. S/O S/O C.MOHAN, AGE R/0 THADAKARA COLONY, 2 10.MADASI SUDARSHAN, S/0 SUBRAMANYAM, AGE ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/0 D.N0.3-1/A, SESHAPURAM VILLAGE AND POST, CHANDRAGIRI MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 11.C.SAI SANTHOSH C.RAVICHANDRA, AGE ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/0 D.NO.4-159, M.R.PALLI, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 12.MEDINA ANJI, S/0 LATE M.MANJUNADHAM, AGE ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/0 YERRATHIVARIPALLI, ST COLONY, SODUM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 13.MEDINA RAVI, S/0 LATE M.MANJUNADHAM, AGE ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/0 YERRATHIVARIPALLI, ST COLONY, SODUM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 13 ARE ACCUSED NOT NECESSARY PARTIES IN THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS. SAI, S/0 LATE ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, through P.S. Vadamalapeta. ...RESPONDENT Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased topleased to allow the Revision by setting aside the order dated 02-09-2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1259 of 2024 in Crime No.63 of 2023 by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur and consequently direct for interim custody of the White Mahindra Scorpio S11 MH 2W, bearing No.AP.03CW 0567, to the petitioner, and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to condone the delay of 191 days in filing the Revision against the order dated 02-09-2024, passed in Crl.M.P.No.1259 of 2024 in Crime No.63 of 2023 of Vadamalapeta Police Station, and pass S' 3 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MUNAKALA VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent: 1 .PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 4 ORDER This Criminal Revision Case is preferred assailing the Order dated 02.09.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1259 of 2024 in Crime No.63 of 2023 of Vadamalapeta Police Station, whereby the petition filed under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘CrPC’) seeking interim custody of Mahindra Scorpio S11 MH 2W bearing registration No.AP 03 CW 0567, was dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the 2. learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is owner of the vehicle in Crime No.63 of 2023 of Vadamalapeta Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 364, 342, 302, 201, 390, 394, 109 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer seized the vehicle viz. Mahindra Scorpio S11 MH 2W bearing registration No.AP 03 CW 0567. Thereafter, the petitioner, who is claiming to be the owner of the said vehicle, filed a petition before the trial Court seeking interim custody of the said vehicle. The trial Court dismissed the said petition on 3. 5 the sole ground that the said vehicle was used in commission of offence and as such interim custody of the vehicle cannot be given to the petitioner. 4. The said ground on which the trial Court dismissed the petition, filed for interim custody of the vehicle, is ex facie erroneous. Simply because the vehicle that was used for commission of offence, the request of the petitioner to give interim custody of the said vehicle cannot be denied or rejected on the said ground. The petitioner is working as MPHA (F), Primary Health Centre, Cherukuvaripalli and she is not an accused in the subject crime. Furthermore, keeping the vehicle idle, especially for extended periods, can lead to a decrease in its value due to various factors like, wear and tear on components, potential damage to the engine and battery, and decreased fuel efficiency. Therefore, usage of vehicle in commission of offence cannot be an impediment for grant of interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner, if she is otherwise entitled. There is no dispute regarding the fact that the 5. petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle. Therefore, if the vehicle is left unused either in the Police Station or in the 6 premises of the Court till the trial of the case is completed, there is every likelihood of vehicle being damaged. Therefore, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside the impugned order, dated 02.09.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1259 of 2024 in Crime No.63 of 2023 of Vadamalapeta Police Station by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur. The learned Magistrate is directed to give interim custody of the said vehicle to the petitioner- 6. (i) on her executing a seif bond for the value of the vehicle to be assessed by the Motor Vehicle Inspector concerned with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur; (ii) on executing an undertaking by the petitioner that she will not alienate the said vehicle or transfer its ownership or change any physical changes to the vehicle; and (iii) on executing an undertaking by the petitioner that she would produce the vehicle as and when directed by the trial Court till the case is disposed of, in the trial Court. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications. 7. if any, pending in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed. Sd/- M RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class; Puttur, Chittoor District. 2. The Station House Officer, Vadamalapeta Police Station, Chittoor District. 3. One CC to Sri Munakala Venkata Ramana Advocate {OPUC] 4. Two CC's to The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies SAM (gsg) HIGH COURT DATED;30/06/2025 ORDER 5 l!JUr2()S^ ^ Current Section ^ ^ 2iSPAlC0^ o CRLRC No. 682 of 2025 ALLOWING THE CRLRC