IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 234 OF 2025 Revision filed under Section 438 &442 of CrPC praying that in the the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase. the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order dated 17-12-2024 in CrI.M.P No. 1698 of 2024 in Cr No.104 of 2024 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kadiri and allow Revision Case circumstances stated in the Criminal Between: 1. Gajjala Janaka Muni Reddy, S/o Gangi Reddy Aged about 69 years, R/o Ramireddipalli Village. Vempalli Mandal, Kadapa District ...REVISION/PETITIONER/PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Nallacheruvu Police Station Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Amaravati. 2. R. Raghuram Sharma., (Defacto-Complainant) S/o MV Ramachandra, Aged about 41 years R/o D No. 107-A, Astalakshmi Street, Kadambathur Post and Mandal, Tiruvalluru District, Tamilnadu 1. State ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI. K V RAGHU VEER uhsfl for the Respondents : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ‘ \ ^o«h made the following ORDER : -5.p f ^ K' ■ i % '1 ' ^ k 0/ % ' T a APHC010092862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 234/2025 Between: Gajjala Janaka Muni Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KVRAGHU VEER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: ...RESPONDENT(S) 1. The Criminal Revision Case, has been filed by the petitioner/claimant under Section 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short. ‘BNSS’), aggrieved by the order dated 17.12.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1698 of 2024, in connection with Crime No.104 of 2024 of 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 seeking interim custody of the crime property (seized bulls), was dismissed. 2. The revision petitioner asserts that he is the claimant and lawful of the livestock, which consists of two white-coloured bulls and five red- coloured bulls, purchased on 21.11.2024, at the Agriculture Market Committee owner 2 in Pulivendula. On 22.11.2024 aforementioned livestock based the 1 respondent/Police, seized the a false complaint lodged by the de facto complainant. The complaint falsely accused the petitioner of engaging in illegai cattle trafficking through Andhra Pradesh, originating from Telangana and Karnataka. The petitioner further contends that the on 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 assures the Court that he will produce the livestock whenever ■ He further required, counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1®* respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits connection with the above-mentioned The petitioner purchased these bulls has been diligently caring for them. The de facto filed the complaint under the mistaken belief that the illegal cattle trafficking through Andhra Pradesh, originating from Telangana and Karnataka. The investigation has have submitted a report to the Court Given the critical role these cattle play in the petitioner's livelihood, he seeks the interim custody of the seized cattle. 3. Heard Sri K.V. Raghuveer, learned that the bulls seized in are the property of the petitioner. case as a means to sustain his livelihood and complainant appears to have petitioner was involved in since been concluded, and the police concerning the seizure of several cattle. now 5. During the pendency of the present Court directed the petitioner to file revision case, on 09.04.2025, this an affidavit specifying the location where the cattle will be kept once released, along with the details further directed that the information of the property and 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 the cattle shed near his house bearing D.No.23, Ramireddypalli village, Vempalli Mandal, provide protection and shelter to the cattle. The YSR District, which is used to premises are equipped with a necessary facilities for the bullocks, which cattle shed that offers all are 3 a intended solely for 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. 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. 6. 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 1®* respondent police shall release the two white coloured bulls and five red coloured bulls to the petitioner and the petitioner shall maintain the bulls by giving sufficient food and 7. 4 water. (2) The 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 1®^ 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.1,40,000/- (Rupees one lakh forty thousand 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. SD/- V.SATYANARAYANA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KADIRI a 2. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate YSR Kadapa. 3. The SHO Nallacheruvu Police Station, Sri Sathya sai District. 2. One CC to SRI. K V RAGHU VEER Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT] 4. THREE CD COPIES NSR TAC HIGH COURT DATED:09/05/2025 ORDER CRLRC.No.234 of 2025 CRIMINAL REVISION CASE IS ALLOWED