THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1359 of 2007 JUDGMENT: The 2nd appellant is the 5th accused in C.C.No.24 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, Hyderabad, which arose out of Crime No.187 of 2003 of P.S.WCO, Team-II, CCS, Hyderabad, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 5 of A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act (for short ‘the Act’). As the allegations leveled against 5th accused and other accused in the present crime and also in other crime numbers are very serious, on the requisition made by the respondent- Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, who is the competent authority under the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, the Government passed ad-interim orders under Section 3 of the Act, attaching the properties of the 5th accused along with properties of other connected persons in other crime numbers, vide G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 19.01.2004. During pendency of the said C.C.No.24 of 2003, the respondent filed Crl.M.P.No.827 of 2004, under Section 4 of the Act, for making the ad-interim attachment order passed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 19.01.2004, absolute, and the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, after adducing the oral and documentary evidence, by his order dated 27.09.2007, partly allowed the petition making attachment of the properties shown in Annexure-I and II of G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 19.01.2004, except item No.11 of Annexure-I, absolute. Aggrieved thereby, the present Criminal Appeal is filed by the 5th accused, as 2nd appellant, and two others, who are the father and cousin sister of the 5th accused, as 1st and 3rd appellants. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the main case i.e., C.C.No.24 of 2003 itself was disposed of by the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, vide judgment dated 08.05.2009, convicting accused No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the Act, while acquitting the remaining accused, including the 2nd appellant herein. In the light of the aforesaid subsequent developments, I am of the considered view that so far as the 2nd appellant alone is concerned, the ad-interim attachment order passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 19.01.2004, and as was made absolute by the order under challenge in this appeal, are liable to be set-aside, and are accordingly set-aside. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. ______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 05.03.2010 v v