't. V IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9729 OF 2024 Between: Poosarla Srinu, S/o.Babu Rao, Aged about 41 Yrs, R/o- D.No.8-49, Near Pedda Ramkovela, Boola Veedhi, Chodavaram, Visakhapatanam ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT 2. Poosarla Lakshmi Kanthi @ Niraja, Present Address Not Known to the Petitioner as she has moved to USA Previous Address as per the DVC Petition W/o.Srinu, aged abt 32 years. Address- D.No.50-1-15/1, Seethampeta, Visakhapatanam. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER Petition under Section 484 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition may be pleased to quash the Order dt.04.07.2022 the High Court passed in f Crl.M.P.No.96/2022 in DVC No.04/2010 on the file of 1 Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam by directing the Trial Court to discharge/return the FDR dt.31.07.2015 in DVC.No.04/2010 lying before the same Hon’ble Court in favour of the Petitioner This Petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Anand Kumar Kochiri Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1. The Court made the following Order: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI APHC010597002024 (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] TUESDAY .THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9729/2024 Between: 1.POOSARLA SRINU,, S/O.BABU RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 R/0- D.NO.8-49, NEAR PEDDA RAMKOVELA, BOOLA VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM, VISAKHAPATANAM YRS ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH. AMARAVATHI. 2.POOSARLA LAKSHMI KANTHI NIRAJA, PRESENT ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AS SHE HAS MOVED TO USA PREVIOUS ADDRESS AS PER THE DVC PETITION W/O.SRINU. AGED ABT 32 YEARS. D.NO.50-1-15/1, ADDRESS- VISAKHAPATANAM. SEETHAMPETA, ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.ANAND KUMAR KOCHIRI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9729 of 2024 ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 484 of BNSS is filed for the following relief: “.....to quash the order dated 04.07.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.96 of 2022 in DVC.No.4 of 2010 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, by directing the Trial Court to discharge/return the FDR dated 31.07.2015 in DVC.No.4 of 2010 lying before the same Hon'ble Court in favour of the petitioner and pass... ” 2. Heard Sri Anand Kumar Kochiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Sri V. Farook, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Home takes notice on behalf of the 1®* respondent-State. The grievance of the petitioner is that as the matter between the petitioner and the 2^^ respondent was compromised, he filed an application before the learned Magistrate under Section 444(1) of Cr.P.C. to discharge surety of the petitioner, and to return the FDR deposited by the surety. But, the learned 4. Magistrate dismissed the application on the ground that the FDR was deposited as per the orders of this Court, and therefore 3 unless there is an order from this Court, he cannot return the FDR as claimed by the petitioner. The order of the learned Magistrate under challenge would disclose that this Court directed the petitioner to furnish surety for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and accordingly, he deposited the surety bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh 5. only) by way of FDR dated 31.07.2015. 6. While so, during pendency of the Crl.A.No.179 of 2012, the petitioner and the 2^*^ respondent entered into compromise at the intervention of elders and accordingly, FCOP was decreed and divorce was granted on 25.07.2017 and as such, the petitioner is entitled to receive the surety bond amount, as the amount was deposited as per the orders of this Court. Fie sought orders of this Court, as it was deposited as per the order of this Court in CRP No.36 of 2015 which was already disposed of on 26.02.2018. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, as both 7. the parties compromised in the matter, the trial Court can return the FDR deposited by the petitioner by passing necessary orders on the application filed by the petitioner. 8. In that view of the mater, the impugned order dated 04.07.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.96 of 2022 in DVC.No.4 of 2010 4 on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, is set aside, and the matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to consider the application as per law and pass necessary orders for return of the FDR. 9. Accordingly, the present Criminal Petition is disposed of. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any. pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. Sd/-G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ^SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The 1st Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam District 2. One CC to Sri. Anand Kumar Kochiri, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies vna * HIGH COURT DATED:07/01/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.9729 of 2024 g 2« JAN 2025 Co , Current Section . DISPOSING OF THE CRLP