V. Anil Kumar vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court noted the report from the Magistrate detailing the seizure of 3 gold biscuits weighing approximately 430 grams, their production before the court, and the dismissal of the petitioner's application for interim custody. The report also indicated a subsequent requisition by the Inspector of Police to transfer the case and property to the Customs Division, Tirupati, which was returned with objections regarding the designation of the receiving officer, a letter to the Customs Department, and the competent court for jurisdiction. The High Court directed the concerned State Police to immediately take necessary steps and pursue the matter before the concerned Court below by complying with the objections raised. The learned Magistrate was directed to take appropriate steps without further delay. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the relevant authorities claiming the subject property. The Criminal Petition was disposed of with these observations and directions.

Facts

This Criminal Petition was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by V. Anil Kumar (the petitioner/accused) seeking to quash an order dated 24.09.2020 passed by the IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tirupati, in Crl.M.P.No.1332 of 2020, concerning Crime No.382 of 2020 registered at Alipiri Police Station, Tirupati. The petitioner sought to file an application before the concerned authorities to claim the subject property. The State, represented by the Assistant Public Prosecutor and the Senior Standing Counsel for Customs and GST, sought appropriate steps and directions for the production of the property before customs authorities. The Court called for a report from the Magistrate regarding the seized property, which was gold biscuits weighing approximately 430 grams, seized on 11.06.2020 and produced before the Magistrate's court on 15.06.2020.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to approach the concerned authorities for claiming the subject property? 2. Whether the Court should grant permission to the police to take appropriate steps regarding the seized property? 3. Whether the Court should issue necessary directions for the production of the subject property before the customs authorities? The petitioner argued that the Court should pass appropriate orders to enable them to file an application before the concerned authorities to claim the subject property. The State, through the Assistant Public Prosecutor, submitted that the Court may grant permission to the police to take appropriate steps. The Senior Standing Counsel for Customs and GST, appearing for the State, contended that the Court may give necessary directions for the production of the subject property before the customs authorities for further investigation on the point of jurisdiction.