APHC010329382025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6908/2025 Between: 1. BAVANAMSRINIVASA REDDY ALIAS B S REDDY, S/O. LATE POTHI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, HINDU, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO. 101, HAPPY HOME APARTMENT, 1ST LANE, NGOS COLONY, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. TELLADEVULAPALLIVENKATA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA MURTHY, ,S/O. T CHANDRA SEKHAR, AGE 44 YEARS, R/O. 5TH LANE, VIKAS NAGAR, PATTABHUPURAM, GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. NAGADAS RAMA CHANDRA PRASAD N PRASAD, S/O. LAKSHMANA RAO, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO. 101, DHARANI TOWERS, 6THLANE, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR CITY AND DISTRICT. 4. TENEERU GANGA RAJU T G RAJU, S/O. MARKANDEYULU AGED 33 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 3-52, ATHUKURU GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS ACCUSED NO. 1,3,4 (RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 ARE NOT NECESSARY PARTIES) 5. B SANKAR BABU, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED 42 YEARS, OCC POLICE OFFICER, R/O. FLAT NO. 316, 3RD FLOOR, TITUPATHI TOWN, TIRUPATHIDISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. K NARSI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 3 ORDER:- The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in C.C.No.746 of 2024 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati. 2. The petitioner is facing trial for the alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 r/w 34 of IPC. The petitioner is the owner of an I-Phone 15 Pro Max, which was seized as a material object while arresting the petitioner. The petitioner has filed Crl.M.P.No.282 of 2024 before the learned Magistrat,e Court seeking interim custody of the mobile phone. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petition by observing that the petitioner did not produce any bill or invoice in support of the petition. 3. Heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 4. The mobile phone belongs to the petitioner it is to be returned to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner submitting an undertaking that he shall produce the mobile phone as and when required for the purpose of trial. 5. In view of the above observations, the Criminal Petition is disposed off. The learned Magistrate is directed to release the I-Phone 15 Pro Max to the petitioner on submission of undertaking from the petitioner to produce it as and when required for the purpose of trial. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not reformate the mobile phone pending trial. It is also made clear that the petitioner shall store all the data in a pendrive and handover to the trial Court. 4 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed off. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt: 07.07.2025 SR