ORDER :

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

2. The present revision is filed aggrieved by the orders passed in Crl. A. No. 32 of 2015 dated 11.09.2015 on the file of the Special Sessions Judge-cum-IV Additional Sessions Judge, Tirupathi, Chittoor District so far as the confiscation of Rs. 78,200/- to the State Government.

3. The facts in brief are that Sri T. Subbanna, Inspector of Police, Tirupathi Rural registered a case in Crime No. 118 of 2008 of Alipiri Police Station against the petitioners and others for the offences under Sections 3, 4, and 7 of the A.P. Gaming Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). After filing the charge sheet, the First Special Judicial Magistrate of Second Class, Tirupathi, taken cognizance of the above said offences and numbered the case as STC No. 294 of 2008. After trial, the learned Magistrate by orders dated 28.12.2011 held that A-1 and A-7, A-9 to A-18 and A-20 to A-32 are not guilty for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of A.P. Gaming Act and accordingly they were acquitted under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C. However, the case property i.e. M.O. 1 cash of Rs. 78,200/- which was already confiscated to the State held stands good. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the petitioners filed Crl. A. No. 32 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the Special Sessions Judge-cum-IV Additional Sessions Judge, Tirupathi. After hearing, the learned Special Judge, by judgment dated 11.09.2015, was pleased to dismiss the appeal confirming the order of confiscation of the case property i.e. M.O. 1 cash of Rs. 78,200/- to the State as per the judgment in STC No. 294 of 2008. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision case is filed.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, contended that both the Courts below committed a material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction vested in them, in confiscating the M.O. 1 cash of Rs. 78,200/- in favour of the State after acquitting the petitioners for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. Even as per mahazar dated 6.04.2008, the said money was seized by the police from the petitioner and as such after acquittal, it ought to have been returned to the petitioners.

5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State, supported the impugned judgment. He contended that the petitioners did not claim the amount when they were examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C. and therefore, the order passed by the lower Court and as confirmed by the appellate Court with regard to confiscation of M.O. 1 cash of Rs. 78,200/- is legal and proper and does not warrant any interference from this Court in revision. He further contended that since the scope of revision is very limited, the petitioners cannot claim refund of the said amount when both the courts below concurrently held that the petitioners are not entitled for refund of the amount.

6. Having heard both the learned counsel and from the perusal of the material on record, the admitted facts are that the petitioners have been charged for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. On full-fledged trial, they were acquitted for the above said offences in STC No. 294 of 2008 by judgment, dated 28.12.2011 by the I Special Judicial Magistrate of Second Class, Tirupathi. However, M.O. 1 cash of Rs. 78,200/- was confiscated to the State. To the extent of the above said amount, the petitioners filed Crl. A. No. 32 of 2015. After hearing, the appeal was also came to be dismissed by judgment dated 11.09.2015.

7. Now, the point that arises for consideration is whether the amount of Rs. 78,200/- is liable to be confiscated to the State when the petitioners are acquitted for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act?

8. The learned Magistrate after appreciation of the material as well as the documentary evidence available on record, came to a conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the petitioners