ORAL ORDER

This criminal petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharathiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) with a prayer to quash the docket order dated 11.02.2025 in C.C.No.2023 of 2024 in Crime No.402 of 2024 on the file of the III Additional Magistrate of First Class, (Criminal Court for Agency Areas), Kothagudem, and to direct the trial Court to release the vehicle owned by the petitioner bearing No.TS29TB4648 Eicher Van Goods Carriage. The petitioner is not arrayed as accused in the said crime and is the owner of the seized vehicle.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the registered owner of an Eicher DCM Van bearing Registration Number TS-29-TB-4648, which was purchased with financial assistance from IndusInd Bank Limited, Suryapet. The vehicle is used for transportation purposes on hire, and the husband of petitioner - Guguloth Bhaskar, drives the vehicle to earn a living. On a particular day, the vehicle was engaged by one Mohammed Moiz Qureshi for transporting cattle on payment of hire charges. Qureshi allegedly informed the husband of petitioner that he had obtained the necessary permission from the Gram Panchayat, Morampalli Banjara Gram Panchayat, for transporting the cattle. However, when the vehicle reached opposite the TSRTC Bus Stand, it was intercepted by the police from Paloncha Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. The police registered a case vide FIR No.402/2024 dated 10-10-2024 against the husband of petitioner, who was implicated as Accused No.1, and Qureshi, who was arrayed as Accused No.2, for offenses punishable under Section 11 read with Section 38 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and Sections 5, 6, 7 read with Section 11 of the Telangana Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Regulation of Livestock and its Movement Act, 1977. The police seized the vehicle and deposited it before the concerned Court. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner filed a petition vide CC.No.2023 of 2024 in Crime No.402/2024 before the trial Court seeking interim custody of the seized vehicle. However, as the vehicle is still in the custody of the police, this criminal petition is filed.

3. Heard Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner, and Smt Shalini Saxena, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1 – State.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was not arrayed as an accused in Crime No.402/2024, which was registered by the Paloncha Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, and despite the same, the vehicle of the petitioner was seized by the police in connection with the said crime. He contended that when petitioner filed petition before the trial Court vide CC.No.2023/2024 seeking interim custody of the seized vehicle the same was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce the original Registration Certificate (RC) of the vehicle. He averred that the petitioner was unable to produce the original RC as it was deposited before the Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate at Mahabubad in relation to another crime case registered vide Crime No.131/2024 before the Bayyaram Police Station. Therefore, he prayed this Court to allow the criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submitted that the subject vehicle was involved in two other crimes, due to which the matter requires to be verified by the trial Court itself.

Therefore, prayed this Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that Crime No.402 of 2024 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 11 read with Section 38 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and Sections 5, 6, 7 read with Section 11 of the Telangana Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Regulation of Livestock and its Movement Act, 1977, for which specific set of Rules for release of v