APHC010455652026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY, THE 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7605/2026 Between: 1. TUMMURI MALLESWARASWAMY, S/O BULLIKASULU,R/O 2-188, BURUGUPUDI, KIRLAMPUDI MANDAL,J.BURUGUPUDI POST, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/3rd party/owner AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh.The SHO, Anandapuram Police Station. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. Chennu Pavan Kumar Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 483(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), seeking modification of the condition imposed on the Petitioner/third party/owner vide 2 order dated 14.08.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.651 of 2026 in Crime No.276 of 2025 of Anandapuram Police Station, passed by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge‑cum‑Special Judge for trial of offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Visakhapatnam (for brevity, ‘the learned Trial Court’). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. On perusal of the record, it is evident that the learned Trial Court allowed the petition filed by the Petitioner seeking return of the vehicle, namely Hero X‑Treme bearing Regd.No.AP 40 EZ 6214, for interim custody, subject to the following conditions: “In the result, petition is allowed and the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Only) with single surety for like sum to the satisfaction of the Court of XV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bheemunipatnam. The petitioner shall furnish Bank Guarantee for Rs.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Only). The petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle or change it's nature and character or physical features during the pendency of the case. The vehicle shall not be used for the commission of any offence. The Investigating Officer shall take the photographs of the vehicle from all angles for the purpose of future identification of the vehicle.” 4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the financial condition of the Petitioner is deplorable and that he is unable to comply with the onerous conditions imposed by the learned Trial Court. 5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat1, gave certain guidelines regarding the granting of temporary custody of property to claimants, wherein at paragraph Nos.7 and 17 as under: 1(2002) 10 SCC 283 3 “7. In our view, the powers under Section 451 CrPC should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely: 1. owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation; 2. court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody; 3. if the proper panchnama before handing over possession of the article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the property in detail; and 4. this jurisdiction of the court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles. 17. In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.” 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 14.08.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.651 of 2026 in Crime No.276 of 2025 of Anandapuram Police Station, passed by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Trial of offences under ‘the NDPS Act’, Visakhapatnam, against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 is hereby modified as under: “The subject vehicle shall be released into the interim custody of the Petitioner, subject to the Petitioner executing a bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one surety, to the satisfaction of the learned XV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bheemunipatnam, as a condition precedent to such release.” 4 7. The residual conditions imposed by ‘the learned Trial Court’ in the original order shall remain in force and shall be duly complied with by the Petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 09.09.2026 PRA/VMM 5 48 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7605 of 2026 Date: 09.09.2026 PRA