IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.688 of 2002 Between: M/s.Konaseema Integrated Coconut Products Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director, Sekhar Garimella, Ambajipeta, E.G.District. ..... APPELLANT(S) AND Confro Agros Ltd., rep by its Managing Director and others .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.688 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner herein is the second accused in C.C.No.169 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Amalapuram. The case is taken on file against the petitioner and another for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 406 and 411 of IPC. During the pendency of the said case, it appears that the petitoner filed Crl.M.P.No.1308 of 2002 for return of the property (Machinery) stating that it is the owner of the said property. The learned Magistrate having considered the said petition and also the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner allowed the said application and ordered release of the said machinery on condition of the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- from any Nationalized Bank. The same is questioned in this petition stating that the said condition of furnishing of bank guarantee to a tune of Rs.5,00,000/- is causing hardship. This Court while admitting this revision on 20.06.2002 issued notice to the other side. Thereafter, on 19.09.2006, the Crl.M.P.No.3006 of 2002 filed with a prayer to order interim custody of the machinery was dismissed. In the light of the dismissal of the Crl.M.P.No.3006 of 2002 by this Court on 19.09.2006, in my considered view this revision must have become infructuous. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 22nd July 2010 CVRK