APHC010092752025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: Between: Komera Vijay Kumar The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K V RAGHU VEER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following 1. The Criminal Revision under Section 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), aggrieved by the order dated Crl.M.P.No.1699 of 2024, in connection with Crime Nallacheruvu Police Station, on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, YSR Kadapa, whereby the petition filed by the revision petitioner under Section 503 of BNSS (seized bulls), was dismissed. 2. The revision petitioner asserts that he is the claimant and lawful owner of the livestock, which consists of two ash coloured bulls, purchased on 21 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 233/2025 ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondent(S): PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: evision Case, has been filed by the petitioner/claimant, under Section 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for aggrieved by the order dated 17.12.2024 , in connection with Crime No.104 of Police Station, on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of , whereby the petition filed by the revision petitioner BNSS seeking interim custody of the crime property was dismissed. The revision petitioner asserts that he is the claimant and lawful owner of the livestock, which consists of two ash-coloured bulls and three red red bulls, purchased on 21.11.2024, at the Agriculture Market Committee IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3369] MALLIKARJUNA RAO ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) by the petitioner/claimant, under Section 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for passed in of 2024 of Police Station, on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of , whereby the petition filed by the revision petitioner, crime property The revision petitioner asserts that he is the claimant and lawful owner ed bulls and three red- 2024, at the Agriculture Market Committee 2 in Pulivendula. On 22.11.2024, the 1st respondent/Police, seized the aforementioned livestock based on a false complaint lodged by the de facto complainant. The complaint falsely accused the petitioner of engaging in illegal cattle trafficking through Andhra Pradesh, originating from Telangana and Karnataka. The petitioner further contends that the livestock was acquired to support his livelihood, and that immediate access to grazing and watering is essential to prevent the animals from perishing due to starvation. He further assures the Court that he will produce the livestock whenever required. 3. Heard Sri K.V. Raghuveer, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bulls seized in connection with the above-mentioned case are the property of the petitioner. The petitioner purchased these bulls as a means to sustain his livelihood and has been diligently caring for them. The de facto complainant appears to have filed the complaint under the mistaken belief that the petitioner was involved in illegal cattle trafficking through Andhra Pradesh, originating from Telangana and Karnataka. The investigation has since been concluded, and the police have submitted a report to the Court concerning the seizure of several cattle. Given the critical role these cattle play in the petitioner’s livelihood, he now seeks the interim custody of the seized cattle. 5. During the pendency of the present revision case, on 09.04.2025, this Court directed the petitioner to file an affidavit specifying the location where the cattle will be kept once released, along with the details of the property and further directed that the information must be provided to the Sub-Inspector of Police for verification of the availability of such a place. In this regard, the petitioner has filed an affidavit before this Court, affirming that he has provided information regarding a cattle shed near his house bearing D.No.2-6-212, Kacheri Street, Pulivendula, YSR District, which is used to provide protection and shelter to the cattle. The premises are equipped with a cattle shed that offers all necessary facilities for the bullocks, which are intended solely for 3 agricultural purposes. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the Station House Officer has verified the information provided by the petitioner and confirmed its correctness. A perusal of the record reveals that the Respondent-State has not disputed the petitioner’s claim of ownership over the seized property. The petitioner has submitted a receipt showing the value of the seized property, which appears to be unreasonable. The allegation against the petitioner that he was involved in illegal cattle trafficking, remains a matter to be adjudicated during the course of trial. The petitioner has also submitted an undertaking, assuring that he will take proper care of the bullocks, ensuring they receive adequate water, fodder, and regular check- ups from the veterinary doctor available in the village. Furthermore, the petitioner has committed to producing the bullocks whenever required and guarantees that he will not dispose of the bullocks pending the resolution of the case. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor placed reliance on the order passed by this Court in Crl.R.C.No.143 of 2024, which involved similar facts and circumstances. Upon considering the submissions made and perusing the said order, this Court is of the view that the present Revision Case can be disposed of on similar terms and conditions. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, as well as the undertaking furnished by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to dispose of the revision case by imposing the following conditions, with the intent of ensuring the protection of the property during the course of trial and safeguarding the scheduled bulls from any possible misuse by the petitioner: (1) The 1st respondent-police shall release the two ash coloured bulls and three red coloured bulls to the petitioner and the petitioner shall maintain the bulls by giving sufficient food and 4 water. (2) The 1st Respondent Police shall conduct a panchanama in the presence of a Revenue Official and two respected elders from the locality where the bulls are currently kept, ensuring that each bull is properly identified and marked with a seal and label. (3) The petitioner shall take the scheduled bulls to the veterinary hospital at his expenses for examination by the veterinary doctor regarding their age and health condition of the bulls and the report of the veterinary doctor shall be submitted to the 1st respondent police. (4) The petitioner shall inform the S.H.O., concerned regarding death or any other ill-health of the bulls and on such incident, the S.H.O., shall conduct panchanama and submit report before the Trial Court. (5) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two local sureties by executing their personal bonds likewise for which the petitioner and sureties are jointly and severally liable if there is any violation against the released scheduled bulls. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO Date: 09.05.2025 MS /SAK 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO Criminal Revision Case No.233 of 2025 Date:09.05.2025 SAK