Aggrieved by the inaction of respondent No.2 in returning
the petitioner’s property, which was the case property in
M.O.No.19, ordered to be released vide Crl.M.P.No.41 of 2025 in
C.C.No.943 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
of First Class (for Prohibition and Excise Offences), Nalgonda
(herein after referred as trial court) and letter Dis. No.120/2025,
dated 19.04.2025, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent No.2 to
release the case property.
2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner is
involved in scrap business for more than three decades at
Chennai. He is doing the business legally by complying all the
statutory formalities. It is further submitted that the petitioner
never committed any offence nor involved in any criminal cases.
Based on a fictitious complaint filed by one K.Suribabu, Manager
(P &A) Department in USTPL Company, a case has been
registered against the petitioner in Crime No.232 of 2013 of PS
Narketpally for the offences under Sections 420, 264 and 265 of
IPC by respondent No.2. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 filed
charge sheet for the offences under Sections 420, 264, 265, 267,
407, 408 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 65 and 66 of
Information Technology Act, 2000. During the investigation, the
petitioner’s property i.e. scrap load has been seized by the
Investigating Officer i.e. respondent No.2. It is further submitted
that the respondent No.2 filed charge sheet along with the seized
scrap load weighing 65,000 kgs worth of Rs.16,25,000/- and
deposited the same vide Form No.60 before the trial court. The
trial court has taken cognizance of the offence and conducted
trial vide C.C.No.943 of 2014. Thereafter, the trial court
acquitted the petitioner of all the charges since the prosecution
failed to prove the guilt vide its judgment dated 26.07.2016.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, the de facto complainant filed a
Criminal Appeal vide Crl.A.No.155 of 2016 and the same was
dismissed by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Nalgonda, confirming the judgment of the trial court, on
23.06.2023. It is further submitted that after dismissal of the
criminal appeal, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.41 of 2025 in
C.C.No.943 of 2014 for return of his property, which was marked
as M.O.No.19 and the said application was allowed by the trial
court directing respondent No.2 to return the case property in
favor of the petitioner vide letter Dis.No.120 of 2025. It is
further submitted that the petitioner approached respondent
No.2 with the said letter requesting to return his property. But
the respondent No.2 failed to comply the order of the trial court.
Questioning the action of respondent No.2, the present Writ
Petition is filed.