AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the docket order
dated 25.01.2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.15 of 2021 in Cr.No.488 of 2020 by the Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Chevella,
Ranga Reddy district.
Heard Sri Palle Sriharinath, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and learned Asst.Public Prosecutor for State and perused the record.
A perusal of the record would reveal that the petitioner herein is the defacto-complainant in the above said crime. The said crime was registered
against the accused for the offences under sections 307, 395, 504 and 506 read with 120-B of the IPC. The subject mobile phone i.e. ‘Samsung
Galaxy S20 Ultra’ was seized by the Police in the above said crime. According to learned Public Prosecutor, the Police have deposited the said
mobile phone in the said crime before the learned Magistrate.
The petitioner herein, being the owner of the said mobile phone, filed an application under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. vide Crl.M.P.No.15 of 2021 in
Cr.No.488 of 2021 before the Court below seeking interim custody of the said mobile phone. The Court below vide order dated, 25.01.2021 dismissed
the said application on the ground that investigation is pending and it is not clear whether the petitioner had recorded anything about the alleged
incident in his mobile phone, or whether A.1 had used it for any other purpose while it was in his possession.
In view of the said finding in the impugned order, this Court directed the leaned Public Prosecutor to get specific instructions with regard to stage of
investigation and also the factum of recording anything either by the petitioner or by A.1 about the alleged incident. Today, on instructions, learned
Public Prosecutor would submit that the Investigating Officer has recorded statements of 5 witnesses and as per the gist of the said statements,
nothing was recorded either by the petitioner or by the A.1 in the said mobile phone about the alleged incident.
In view of the same, according to this Court, the petitioner is entitled for the subject mobile phone towards interim custody.
Therefore, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the docket order dated 25.01.2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.15 of 2021 in Cr.No.488 of 2020 by
the Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Chevella, Ranga Reddy district. The learned Magistrate is directed to return the said
mobile phone to the petitioner herein/defacto-complainant in Cr.No.488 of 2020, towards interim custody on imposition of certain conditions to its
satisfaction.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Criminal Petition shall stand closed.