IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6549 OF 2009 Between: Md. Sharfuddin. ..... PETITIONER. AND The State of A.P., Rep. by its Station House Officer, Tekulapalli Police station, Khammam District, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, and five others. ..... RESPONDENTS. Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased to quash the Order dated 27-05-2009 in Crl.M.P. No.1843 of 2009 in Crime No.32 of 2009 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu, and also the Order dated 08-07-2009 in Criminal Revision Petition No.21 of 2009 on the file of the Court of Judge, Family Court cum Additional Sessions Judge at Khammam and consequently direct the first respondent therein to release the seized Tractor along with Compressor bearing No. AP 23 C 6514 for interim custody and pass such other orders. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. N. Rajamalla Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the first respondent, the Court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6549 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri N. Rajamalla Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel, representing the learned Public prosecutor for the first respondent. The respondents 2 to 6 were stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner to have been served with the notices of this petition, the proof of which was filed into the Registry. None appeared for the other respondents. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.M.P. No.1843 of 2009 in Crime No.32 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu, on 27-05-2009 and the order in Revision passed on 08-07-2009 in Criminal Revision Petition No.21 of 2009 by the Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional Sessions Judge at Khammam. The petitioner filed the said petition for the interim custody of the Tractor along with jacke compressor bearing No. AP23C 6514 and the learned Magistrate dismissed the application as the investigation was still in progress and as huge quantity of explosives was recovered and as the case is triable by the Court of Session, the learned Magistrate considered it unsafe to order interim custody of the vehicle. The learned Sessions Judge, in Revision considered that as no trip sheet was filed by the petitioner to show that he entered into a contract for the transport of explosives and as no permission was obtained from the concerned authorities for such transport of explosives, it is unsafe to hand over the interim custody of the case property to the petitioner. The petitioner did not seek return or custody of the explosives themselves which might have rendered acceptance of such request an unsafe proposition. If he had transported the explosives in his tractor without permission from the concerned authorities and if he was transporting the same without any entries in the trip sheet, he will be liable for the penal consequences under the relevant laws in respect of such violations but the present consideration is confined to the manner in which the Tractor and the jacke compressor bearing No.AP23C 6514 should be dealt with pending finality of the Criminal proceedings. The claims of innocence of the petitioner may be true or may be untrue, which will be gone into and decided on merits, in accordance with law by the trial Court on the oral and documentary evidence to be placed before it during trial and the Tractor and jacke compressor bearing No.AP23C 6514, even if they are entrusted to the interim custody of the petitioner, pending a final decision in the Criminal case, will be subject to the final property orders to be passed by the Court. If the property were to be returned to the petitioner subject to appropriate conditions in tune with scope of Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the same will secure the ends of justice. In fact, the Supreme Court laid down in Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat[1] that the vehicles seized in Criminal Cases should not be allowed to become junk by being kept unattended and unused in the premises of the police stations till the finality of the Criminal proceedings. The Apex Court directed that appropriate judicious and expeditious orders should be passed in respect of such vehicles within six months by imposing appropriate conditions. The ostensible ownership of the vehicle with the petitioner is not in dispute and he is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by the Court. Therefore, interim custody of the property should be entrusted to the petitioner. In the result, the Tractor and jacke compressor bearing No.AP23C 6514 seized in Crime No.32 of 2009 of Tekulapalli police station of Khammam district shall be entrusted to the interim custody of the petitioner, on his execution of personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand only) with one surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Yellandu, further subject to the petitioner undertaking to maintain such Tractor and jacke compressor bearing No.AP23C 6514 in the same physical state without any alteration in their physical features and not to alienate or encumber the same and to produce the same whenever directed by the Court. The Criminal petition is ordered accordingly. ____________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 25-09-2009. Dsh. [1] (2002) 10 Supreme Court Cases 283.