Uday Stone Crushing Private Limited VsState Of Telangana

This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C'), is filed by the petitioner, seeking to quash the order dated 09.05.2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.555 of 2020 in Cr.No.10/RCO/RRR/2020 (ACB, Ranga Reddy Range, Hyderabad) by the learned I Additional Special Judge for trial of SPE & ACB cases, Hyderabad, wherein the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 r/w 457 of Cr.P.C seeking to direct the respondent/ACB to produce the vehicle i.e, CRETA 1.6 CRDI SX (O) BSIV bearing No.TS 07 GJ 0639, which was seized by the respondent/ACB in the subject crime and to grant interim custody of the said vehicle pending disposal of the case, was dismissed.

Heard Sri S.Nagender, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri T.L.Nayan Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for ACB/ respondent and perused the record.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would that petitioner is the Proprietor of the Uday Stone Crushing Private Limited and he has purchased Creta 1.6 CRDI SX (O) BSIV bearing No.TS 07 GJ 0639. The Registration Certificate (R.C) book is also in its name. The petitioner has nothing to do with the corruption allegations made against Sri Erva Balraju Nagaraju, Tahsildar, Keesara Mandal. The petitioner contends that the subject vehicle has been seized in the subject crime and the original R.C was not traced out and therefore, he obtained duplicate R.C book from the office concerned and filed before this Court. It is further submitted that if the subject vehicle is kept idle with the respondent, it would certainly get damaged and the value of the vehicle gets deteriorated. However, if the interim custody of the subject vehicle is given to the petitioner, he is prepared to furnish security as directed and abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. The petitioner is prepared to produce the vehicle as and when directed by this Court or by the trial Court at any place or before any authority and ultimately prayed to allow the Criminal Petition as prayed for.

On the other hand, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for ACB filed counter affidavit and contended that the petitioner is benami of Sri Erva Balraju Nagaraju, Tahsildar, Keesara Mandal, who was caught red-handed with hard cash of Rs.1,10,00,000/- besides other valuable property. Further, on the subject vehicle, it was written as Government vehicle. Therefore, the matter requires investigation and ultimately prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

In view of the above submissions, the point for determination in this Criminal Petition is:

"Whether the petitioner is entitled for interim custody of the subject vehicle?"

POINT: As seen from the material placed on record, prima facie, the duplicate of the R.C. book reveals that the petitioner is the owner of the subject vehicle. Mere mentioning on the subject vehicle, as Government vehicle, it would not either convey that it belongs to Government or the delinquent officer i.e, Sri Erva Balraju Nagaraju. The truth or otherwise of the benami transaction would come to light either in the course of investigation or after conclusion of trial of the case. If the subject vehicle is kept unused with the respondent, it will be completely damaged and it would jeopardise the interest of the real owner. Till controversy is settled either in the investigation or on completion of the trial, as the case may be, the petitioner being the registered owner of the subject vehicle, is entitled for interim custody of the subject vehicle.

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 09.05.2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.555 of 2020 in Cr.No.10/RCO/RRR/2020 (ACB, Ranga Reddy Range, Hyderabad) by the learned I Additional Special Judge for trial of SPE & ACB cases, Hyderabad, is set aside and the interim custody of the vehicle i.e, CRETA 1.6 CRDI SX (O) BSIV bearing No.TS 07 GJ 0639, is ordered to be given to the petitioner subject to his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) with one third party surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. On entrustment of interim custody of the subject vehicle, the petitioner shall not alienate or transfer the subject vehicle in any manner and shall maintain it in the same good and road worthy condition, without changing any of its features and major parts and should produce it along with its vehicular documents at a specified place or before a specified authority during the course of investigation or as and when directed by the trial Court and cooperate with the investigating agency.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.