The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana State.

2. Sri Mohd Osman, S/o Mohd Hameed, Aged 35 years, R/o. H. No'17-7-192, Nagabowli. Yakuthpura Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to directing the VII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Nampally) at Hyderabad to release amount of Rs. 2,97,000/- of the petitioner. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MOHMMAD ABDUL KALAM SlDD|QUl, Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms. Shalini Saxena, the Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.77O3 OF 2Ctz5 ORDER: This Clin-rinal Petitior-r is liled by Lhe petiti,rncr accutsecl No. 1 scei<ing [o sct aside thc orclcr dared O 1.0,1. ,2025 p:rssecl in Crl.M.l'.No.617 of 2025 in Crimc No.35 of 20 19 b1. Lhe learnerl Vll Additional Chiel Judicial Magistrate at Hyderabacl (ibr short .the trial Court') and reLurn thc cash allegcd to have b:cn scized ltom accusccl No- 1.

2. lleard lhe submissiorrs of Sri Mohammec Abclul Kalam Sid<liqui, lcanrcd cour-rscl for thc petitioner arrd Smt.Shalini Shekshana, lcarucd Assistant public prosecutor for rcsponclcnt No.1 St.1tc

3. Thc learncd pctitioner counsel submits that Ihe proceedings against aocuscd No.l u.ere quashed by a Bench of this Court viclc orders datcd O5.O9.2O24 in Criminal petition No 5(r5 I of 2021. The oflences allcged against the petitioner under Sectrons 420, 467, 468 ancl 471 of the Inciian penal Code, 12(1)(Rl o[ passporL AcL, 1967 , u,erc quashed b1. this Court. pursuz I,r t t() the saicl quash orders, the petrtior-rer has filed a petition un<ler Section 451 rqd rvith Section 457 of Criminal procedurc Code, 19711 before the trial Conrt for relurn ol property i.c. ne1 cash o[ 1 Rs.2,97,000/-, trvo cell phones and original passport bearing No.P4468983, that was seized by the police as a part of investigation. The trial Court having heard the matLer and on pcrusal of thc rccord, has partl1' allou'ed Lhc sztrd petition and rcturned trvo mobilc phones ancl also the passport to thc pctitioner but has dismissed the order against the return of cash i.e. Rs.2,97,OO0/ . t{c further argued that r'r'hen the mattcr iLself has becn quashed against the petitioncr hcrein, u'ho is not lacing ar-ry other chargcs leveled by the prosecution, t hcn thcre is no point in u,ithholdir-rg the cash pertaining to tl-rc pctitioncr herein and that the trial Court has passed an crroneous order' He aside lhe said ordcr and relcase his t herefo re. PraYcd to set amount lying in thc Court The learned Assistant Public Proscct-ttor has submittcd that

4. the proceedings againsl accused No' 1 are only quashed and that the prosecution is still proceecling against accuscd Nos 2 and 3 and that the police have not yet hled the charge sheet in the prese nt case and the refore, the trial Court has rightly withheld the amount, she therefore, prayed to dismiss thc petition'

5. Peruscd the record 3 (r. The rccorcl rcveals tltat thc 1;ctitioncr hcrcin is accused No.l in Crinre No.35 of 20 t 9 on L}-re tile ol p.S.S aidabad. .I.he allcgar.ions point out t.hat thc 1;etitioner along u,itlr h:w oLhcrs arc allcgcd Lrr have dcceii,ccl Ll c rle facto complainant s t:ttinq that the.v ,"l,oulcl proce ss Ll-rc VISA to C.rnada and Lhert su tsequcntly, I he de focto complainant raised suspicion anci lodg,:cl a complainr against the petitioner and others. During the course ol' irrve'stigation. tltc police havc st:izccl ccrtair-r propcrt\, lrom tl.rc pe t iLioncr-acc r-r sccl No. I i.c. lu o mobile phone;, thc original passporL be:rring No.P4468983 and cash of Rs.2,9? ,OOO i . 1 Thc pcrilroner- has filccl .r pcLiLiolt beforc tl,ris Court vide Crl.l'.No.5651 of 2024 to quash thc proceedings aqainst liim ancl subscquenth,, s'hen the de /oclo complainant has agreecl to cornpound rlre ofl'ences, rhc lteritioncr has llled Crl.M.p.Nos.4 and I> and hence, thc InatLer endccl in a compromisc. ,l.herelcrre, t his Court rccordcd rhe compromise and allorved the srLid petitions on pa),nrcr-r1 of costs ol Rs.5,0O0/ to Lhc Dircctor, tjainik Wclfarc, Ilydcrab.rd ancl Rs.5,OOO/ to Lhc Tclangan: High Courl Advor:ates Association, Hyderabad. Thus, thc allegations levclcd by thc prosecutron in Crirne No.35 of 2Ol9 agains - the petitioner hcrcin u'ere qu;r s hed. "w 4 O. Pursuant to the said orders, the petitioncr has filed Crl.M.P.No.617 ol 2025 before lhe lrial Court to relcase the property lying in the Courl in his favour, but the trial Court vidc its order dated O 1.04.2025 has relcased his mobile phones and passport but has withheld the cash I . This Courl, finds no merit in withholding the cash the petitioner. The remand case diary also shou's pcrtaining to that the said cash was seizcd from accused No.1 during thc intcstigation b5' the Policc. Now since the proccedings arc quashed against thc petitioner herein, the property seized from him need noL bc retained in the Court. lD . It is pertinent to take note of the fact that t he matte r \ ras settled and the olfences were compounded at the ir-rstance of thc de facto complainant and the pelitioner hcrein Thus, there is ncr point in retaining the propertv pertaining to the pctitioner' l'lcnce' thc petition is entitled to be allowed. In Lhe result, the Criminal Petition is allowed setting aside 1l the order dated O1.O4.2025 passed in Crl M P No '617 of 2025 rn Crime No.35 of 2Ol9 by the learned VII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Hyderabad and the trial Court is directed to release 5 Lhc casl-r of Iis..2,97,000/ in favour of the petlliont,r-on production of proper idcntity, ackno\ ,ledgment and receipt. Miscellancous applications pending, if a11 , shall stand //TRUE COPY// SD/- A.V.S. PRASAD ]EPUTY REGISTRAR $r; FFICER SEC To, 1 2 3 4 The Vll Addl. Chief Metropolitan lVagrstrate (Nampally) ;rt Hyderabaci. The Station House Officer, Saidabad police Station, Hyclerabad. One CC to SRt MOHMTMAD ABDUL KALAM StDDIeUt r\dvocale [OPUC] Two CCs to public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies GR/gh HIGH COURT DATED:1610712025 ORDER CRLP.No.7703 of 2025 .\ la,-,,1 iHE S c \.

77. 10 5:P 2025 O7 a /,- { ? THE CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED