IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH (27TH) DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.5972 of 2011 Between: Thudavarthi Suresh Babu …Petitioner And: State of A.P., rep. by its Public Prosecutor, SHO, Pedanandipadu PS, Guntur district … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.5972 of 2011 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking modification of the conditions imposed in the order dated 30.03.2011 in Crl.R.P.No.3 of 2011 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Guntur, wherein the learned Sessions Judge while allowing the revision petition set aside the order dated 18.10.2010 in Crl.M.P.No.3893 of 2010 in Cr.No.46 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Bapatla, however, directed return of the schedule mentioned items of the property to interim custody of the petitioner, on his furnishing bank guarantee for the value of the said gold items, besides imposing other conditions. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. Perused the record. 3. Based on the complaint given by the petitioner herein, Pedanandipadu police registered Cr.No.46 of 2010 for the offence under Section 395 IPC. Investigation is stated to be pending. While so, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.3893 of 2010 under section 451 Cr.P.C. seeking interim custody of the property i.e., items 1 to 41 gold jewellery, silver articles besides wrist watches, mentioned in the schedule annexed to the petition. The learned Magistrate by order dated 18.10.2010 dismissed the application on the ground that the investigation is pending. The petitioner filed Crl.R.C.No.3 of 2011. The learned Sessions Judge, by order dated 30.03.2011 allowed the revision directing that the items be given to the petitioner for interim custody. However, he further directed the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee for the value of the said items 1 to 41. It is stated that the total value of the schedule items is about Rs.nine lakhs. 4. In the circumstances, having regard to fact that the petitioner-complainant is stated to be the owner of the property, it is considered that the said items can be delivered to the petitioner- complainant for the interim custody, under proper acknowledgment, subject to his executing a bond for Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees nine lakhs only) with one surety for the like sum, instead of furnishing bank guarantee, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Bapatla. The petitioner shall produce the said items as and when directed by the court in the same shape and condition and shall not in any way change the said property or create encumbrances or third party interest thereon. The impugned order is modified accordingly. 5. In the result, the criminal petition is disposed of as stated above. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 27.07.2011 bss