IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY THE TWENTYFIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10434 OF 2010 Between: Sajanlal … Petitioner V/s The State of A.P. Represented by its Public Prosecutor & 4-Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri M. Lakkadi Dayaker Reddy Counsel for the Respondent Nos.: Addl.Public Prosecutor THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10434 OF 2010 O R D E R : This Criminal Petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the order dated 19-8-2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, Adilabad in Crl.RP.No. 15 of 2010 filed against Crl.MP.No. 110 of 2010 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal. 2. Respondents 2 to 4 are accused in Cr.No. 8 of 2010 of Mamda Police Station on the allegation of committing the offence under section 395 of IPC and according to the prosecution an amount of Rs.4,60,000/- was recovered from them by the Investigating Officer. The revision petitioner filed Crl.MP.No. 110 of 2010 before the learned Magistrate seeking interim custody of the amount allegedly recovered from respondents 2 to 5 and in the said proceedings respondents 2 to 5 claimed the amount as belonging to them and the learned Magistrate passed an order directing the revision petitioner to execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.4,60,000-00 (Rs. Four lakhs and sixty thousand only) and in addition to furnish bank guarantee to a tune of Rs.2,50,000-00 (Rs.Two lakhs and fifty thousand only) with two sureties each for the likesum for the release of the amount to the custody of the petitioner. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a revision in Crl.RP.No. 15 of 2010 and the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Adilabad, by his order dated 19-8-2010 modified the order passed by the learned Magistrate directing the petitioner to execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.5,00,000-00 (Rs. Five lakhs only) with two sureties each for the likesum together with security of immovable property by means of depositing the registered title deeds worth of Rs.5,00,000-00 each contending that the condition imposed by the learned Sessions Judge in Crl.RP.No. 15 of 2010 is also harsh and it is not possible for him to comply with, the petitioner filed the present Criminal Petition to quash the said order. 4. Since the respondents 2 to 5 (A-1 to A-4) have been claiming the property, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge does not appear to be unreasonable because both the courts expressed the view that the entitlement to the cash will be decided in conclusion of the trial. If that is so, without furnishing property security, the petitioner takes away the amount and spent it away and if it is ultimately found that the property belongs to the accused, it is very difficult for the Court to restore the same. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and accordingly the Criminal Petition stands dismissed. JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 25/10/2010 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10434 OF 2010 Circulation No. 137 25-10-2010 Computer No.43 I s L