`IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.12261 of 2010 Between:- Mohd.Yousuf …Petitioner A n d The State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and five others …Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.12261 of 2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C assailing the order dated 12-04-2010 in Crl.R.P.No.55 of 2009, on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondent. Perused the record. 3. The petitioner is complainant (L.W.1) in C.C.No.502 of 2009, on the file of the XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The respondents 2 to 5 are facing prosecution for the offences under Sections 454, 506, 188 and 34 IPC. According to the petitioner, he is stated to be a Mutavalli of the said wakf property. The keys of the said property were seized by the police. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.228 of 2009 before the learned Magistrate seeking return of the keys of the wakf property on the ground that the said property is proposed to be developed and improved. The learned Magistrate, by order dated 02-03-2009, allowed the said application and directed that the keys be handed to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred Crl.R.P.No.55 of 2009 and the learned Sessions Judge, by the impugned order dated 12-04-2010 allowed the said revision petition and set aside the order of the learned Magistrate and consequently dismissed Crl.M.P.No.228 of 2009 with a direction to the trial Court to pass appropriate orders regarding return of the property only after full- fledged trial of the case. 4. It is stated that the trial of the case is in progress. At this stage, it is considered inexpedient to pass any order on merits regarding the return of the case property. Learned counsel for the petitioner expressed apprehension that in case the conclusion of the trial gets delayed, the development activities proposed to be undertaken in respect of the said wakf property also would get delayed consequently. In the circumstances, it is considered that a direction can be issued to the learned Magistrate for expeditious disposal of the case. The trial is already underway. The learned XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad is, therefore, directed to make every endeavour to dispose of the case in C.C.No.502 of 2009 at an early date and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. In the result, the criminal petition is disposed of, with the above direction. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 10th December, 2010 Note:: CC by Monday Lrkm.