HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2218 of 2010 3rd December, 2010 Between :- B.S.S.R.Gopalaswamy .. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Public Prosecution, High Court of A.P., HYDERABAD .. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2218 of 2010 ORDER:- This revision is directed against the order dated 12-10-2010 passed in Crl.M.P.No.6936 of 2010 in crime No.85 of 2010 of P.S.Kushaiguda. The petitioner is the defacto complainant in Crime No.85 of 2010 of P.S.Kushaiguda. During the course of investigation, an amount of Rs.9,89,500/- came to be seized and produced before the X- Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.6936 of 2010 under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. seeking return of the cash for interim custody. The learned Magistrate, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the Counsel for petitioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State, proceeded to allow the application subject to the petitioner furnishing a bank guaranteee for Rs.10,00,000/-. Aggrieved by the said condition, the petitioner has filed this revision. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not in a position to secure bank guarantee worth of Rs.10,00,000/- and therefore he is not able to avail the benefit of the order passed by the X-Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri. Indisputably, the trial is yet to be conducted and final order with regard to the seized property is to be passed at the time of disposal of the case. Pending disposal of the case, the petitioner approached the Court for return of cash of Rs.9,89,500/- for interim custody. The Trial Court having considered the facts and circumstances ordered for return of the cash for interim custody subject to he petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for Rs.10,00,000/-. In the given facts and circumstances, the condition imposed for release of the cash of Rs.9,89,500/- for interim custody cannot be said to be onerous. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ________________________ B.Seshasayana Reddy,J 3rd December, 2010 smr