Kakunuru Rahul v. 1. The State of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CRIMINAL PETITION No. 721 1 0F 2025 ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 503(2) read with 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik suraksha sanh ita, 2023 (hereinafter 'the BNSS') seeking to release the petitioner's vehicle Ford Endeavour Car bearing Registration No. TS 15 FD 2767, which was in the custody of the police, , Gummadidala, in Crime No. 231 of 2024 of Gummadidala Police Station, Sangareddy District.

2. Hdard Mr. A. Venkata Narayana Reddy, learned counsel for: the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additionat Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No. 1 -State.

3. Briefly stated relevant facts are that the vehicle of the petitioner. was seized by the police concerned in an offence under Section 8(c) read with Sections 22(c), 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short'NDPS Act') The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per the instructions received, the vehicle in question was seized by the police in connection with crime No 231 of 2024. However, the said vehicle has not been produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate to date. The '-.^-\, :q 2 t. N7&/ Crl.P. No. 721 t of 2025 petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the vehicle, being left idle and ,: exposed to the elements, is likely to suffer damage and depreciation in value due to prolonged disuse and climatic exposure.

5. ln view of this, the petitioner approached the t Additiona! District and Sessions Court by filing an application under Section 503 of the BNSS, seeking interim custody of the vehicle. However, the said application was returned with an endorsement stating that the property in question had not been deposited before the Court-

6. Subsequently, the petitioner re-submitted the apptication with a supporting endorsement highlighting that the Court is vested with the authority to direct the concerned police to produce or deposit the property before the Court for appropriate orders. Despite this; the petition was once again returned, without adjudication on merits. Left with no efficacious remedy, the petitioner now seeks a direction from this Hon'ble Court to instruct the concerned police authorities to produce the seized vehicle before the appropriate Court and to consider the petitioner's prayer for interim custody in accordance with law.

7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that, according to the petitioner, although the vehicle was seized by the police, it has not yet been produced before the competent Court. Nevertheless, it is submitted that the Court does possess the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the \ ".* --"- 3 N7R,/ (.ri.P. Xo. 721 I ol'2025 application and pass appropriate orders under Section 503 of the BNSS/Section 457 of the CrPC, as applicable.

8. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both parties and have examined the material available on record.

9. lt is an admitted fact that the vehicle in question was seized by the Gummadidala Police, $angareddy, in connection with a case registered under the NDPS Act. Be that as it may, the remand report dated 10.01 .2025 clearly records that the vehicle was seized from Accused No. 1 and'is now the subject matter of the present request for interim custody. Notwithstanding this, the petitioner has filed an application seeking interim custody of the said vehicle before the competent Court that is presently seized of the proceedings arising from the said crime.

10. lt is important to note that Sections 497, 498, and 503 of the BNSS govern the procedures related to the custody and disposal of property involved in crimina! proceedings. These provisions ensure the systematic handling of property either seized or produced during the course of an investigation, inquiry, or trial. Section 497 pertains to the interim custody and, where necessary, the provisional disposal of property that is produced before a criminal Court or Magistrate during the pendency of an investigation, inquiry, orlgig[. 4 N:ml Ctil.P. No. 721I ol'2025 This provision enables the Court to make appropriate orders for the : safekeeping or use of such property to prevent deterioration, misuse, or delay in justice. : 498 addresses the final disposal of property after the conclusion of the investigation, inquiry, or trial. lt empowers the Court to issue definitive orders for the return, confiscation, or destruction of the property, depending on the outcome of the case and the rights of claimants. Section 503 outlines the procedure to be followed by the police when property is seized but not presented before a criminal Court during the I .. course of an inquiry or trial. This Section ensures accountability and proper documentation for such property, mandating police'comptiance ryith prescribed procedures even when judicial proceedings are not actively engaged.

11. Collectively, these Sections form a comprehensive legal framework for the management of property associated with criminal cases, balancing judicial oversight with administrative efficiency

12. Therefore, in circumstances, where property has been seized but not yet produced before the competent Court, the procedure prescribed under Section 503 of the BNSS, must be duly followed. For better understanding and appreciation, the said provision is extracted herein "'.Qlow: ---t- b: 5 N71(./ (.r/.1>. X,o. 721 I rl 202i (1) Whenever the seizure of pirsp611, by any police officer is reported to a Magistrate under the provisions of this Sanhita, and such property rs nof produced before a Criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, the Magistrate may make such order as he thinks fit respecting the disposal of such property or the delivery of such propefty to the person entitted to the possession thereof, or if such person cannot be ascerlained, respecting the custody and production of such propefty (2) tt the person so entitled is known, the Magistrate may order the propefty to be delivered to him on such conditions (if any) as the Magistrate thinks fit and if such person is unknown, the Magistrate may detain it and shall, in such case, ,ssue a proclamation specifying the articles of which such property consr'sfs, and requiring any person who may have a claim thereto, to appear before him and esfa0ftbh his claim within six months from the date of such proclamation. :

13. Thus, a plain reading of this provision makes it clear that even when the property has been seized but not yet produced before the criminal Court, the Magistrate or the Court concerned retains the jurisdiction to examine the matter and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

14. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with a similar situation under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the case of Smf. Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil v sfate of Mysore, \ AIR 1977 SC 174g,held that a Magistrate is vested with the jurisdiction to pass appropriate orders under Section 457 crPC even prior to the \ commencement of an inquiry or trial, provided the property has been seized by the police and a report of such seizure has been submitted to the Magistrate. 6 Nm,./ (.lr/.lt. No. 721 I o.f2O25

15. ln light of the above legal position, the refusal of the Court to entertain the petition solely on the ground that the seized property has not been deposited before it is legally unsustainable. The statutory scheme clearly permits judicial intervention in such circumstances. Although this Court could entertain the present petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, having regard to the fact that the relevant case records and materials are available before the Court of first instance, it is deemed appropriate to clarify the procedural course to be followed in such matters.

16. Accordingly, this Court finds it just and proper to relegate the petitioner tp the trial Court with liberty to file an appropriate application seeking interim custody of the vehicle. Upon such filing, the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy, is directed to entertain the said application and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

17. With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous appl ications, if any, shall stand closed. SD'. B. REKHA G s /ITRUE COPY" To,

1. The Special First Additional District and Sessions Judge at Sangareddy' Sanadareddy District '

2. The Station House Officer, Gummadidala Police Station' Gummadidala' SangareddY District I I i I I i I i I i I I / / ,/ ,/ /- -I I I l, t! i

3. One CC to SRI A VENKATANARAYANA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad TOUTI /

5. Two CD Copies VM/PSL Yt HIGH COURT DATED: 18lOGl2O25 \ \ 4 -2 \ \ ORDER CRLP.No.7211 ol2025 S \ * 0 I JAN ?ilz[ 7 I i':".' DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION g *U*"