THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1542 OF 2009 14TH OCTOBER 2009 BETWEEN: K.NAGESH KUMAR .. PETITIONER AND STATE OF A.P. AND OTHER .. RESPONDENTS THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1542 OF 2009 O R D E R: This Criminal Revision case is directed against the order dated 26.8.2009 passed in Crl.M.P.No.5136 of 2009 in Crime No.239 of 2009 on the file of XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, whereby and where under the application filed by the petitioner under section 451 r/w 457 of Cr.P.C ended in dismissal. Background facts of the case in nutshell leading to filing of this revision by the petitioner are: The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle bearing No.AP 10 AM 2507. He purchased the vehicle by raising finance from 2nd respondent. The vehicle came to be seized by the police in connection with Crime No.239 of 2009 of Bowenpally Police Station, Hyderabad registered for the offences under sections 144, 148, 307, 302 r/w 34 IPC. It is the version of the prosecution that the vehicle has been used by A1 to A8 to reach the scene of offence. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.5136 of 2009 under section 451 r/w 457 IPC for release of the vehicle for interim custody. The learned XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, dismissed the application on the ground that the vehicle has been used for the commission of the offence by the order impugned in this revision. Hence, this revision by the petitioner. R2, despite notice being served, did not choose to enter appearance either in person or through a counsel. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that if the vehicle is kept in custody of the police there is every likelihood of its utility being lost and therefore the vehicle seized by the police is required to be released to the petitioner for interim custody. As per the version of the prosecution, the vehicle is stated to be used by A1 to A8 to reach the scene. Indisputably, the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle in question. If the vehicle is allowed to be in custody of the police there is every likelihood of its utility being diminished. Since the case is not yet committed to the Sessions and there is every likelihood of some more time being taken for conclusion of the proceedings, I deem it appropriate to release the vehicle to the petitioner for interim custody on certain terms. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed at the admission stage setting aside the order impugned in this revision and the vehicle bearing No.AP 10 AM 2507 is ordered to be released to the petitioner for interim custody, subject to the following conditions: 1) He shall furnish a bond for Rs.1.00 lakh with one surety to the satisfaction of XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad; 2) He shall give an undertaking that he will not alter the physical features of the vehicle in question; 3) He shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle pending trial or enquiry of the case; 4) He will produce the vehicle in question before the court as and when required. 14th OCTOBER, 2009. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1542 OF 2009 14TH OCTOBER 2009