APHC010076612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2124/2025 Between: The Branch Manager ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. K B RAMANNA DORA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. P SAI SURYA TEJA The Court made the following order: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking to quash the order dated 17.02.2025 in Crl.R.P.No.42/2022, on the file of V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tirupati, Conforming the order dated 01.11.2022 in Crl.M.P.No.2972 of 2022 in Cr.No.13 of 2020, on the file of V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/revision petitioner submits that, aggrieved by the order dated 01.11.2022 in Crl.M.P.No.2972 of 2022, the petitioner filed a revision petition vide Crl.R.P.No.42 of 2022, on the file of V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tirupati. He further submits that the only ground for filing revision petition before the V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tirupati, is that, no notice was issued to the petitioner before passing an order by the Trial Court. Without appreciating the said fact, the revisional Court directed the petitioner herein to produce the gold weighing about 343.5 grams within one (01) month, failing which, the revision petition stands dismissed, and in case, the revision petitioner produces the gold, the order dated 01.11.2022 in Crl.M.P.No.2972 of 2022 in Cr.No.13 of 2020, on the file of V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati, is deemed to be set aside, and the trial Court is directed to pass fresh orders after hearing both the parties and the parties shall obey the orders of the trial Court in respect of gold. As against the same, the present criminal petition is filed. 4. Perused the record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties. 5. The Session Court has also heard the de-facto complainant, whose gold was subjected to theft, and the same gold was also subject of mortgage with the petitioner’s company. As such, the Session Court rightly directed the petitioner to produce the gold weighing 343.5 grams before the learned Magistrate. In the case of mortgage of gold with the finance company, which deals with extending finance by depositing of gold, and in the cases where the subject gold is a minor property, which is under investigation by the police for the offence of theft, the right and the claim of the victim over the gold has to be kept in the mind by the Courts pursuant to such cases. 6. As seen from order dated 17.02.2025 in Crl.R.P.No.42/2022, on the file of V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tirupati, this Court is of the opinion that the Session Court, has considered all the submissions and perused the materials placed thereon and has passed a reasoned order. Hence, this Court does not find any valid ground to interfere with the order of the Sessions’ Court, Tirupati. As such, the criminal petition is misconceived and is liable to dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any shall stand closed. _____________ HARINATH.N,J Date: 17.03.2025 ANS 187 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2124/2025 Date: 17.03.2025 ANS