THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.5184 of 2009

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) by the petitioner/accused No.3 aggrieved by the order, dated 21.11.2003, in Crl.M.P. No.1405 of 2003 in C.C. No.2 of 2000 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

2. Heard Mr. C.Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-

State. No representation on behalf of respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that residential property of the petitioner bearing municipal No.8-3-230/B 45-46, Venkatgiri, Yousufguda admeasuring 600 square yards was attached pursuant to the order passed by the trial Court in Crl.M.P.No.1405 of 2003 in C.C. No.3 of 2003. The trial Court after full-fledged trial acquitted the petitioner/accused No.3 for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC and Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act on 19.02.2008. Subsequently, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P. No. 180 of 2009 seeking to raise attachment in respect of the above said property on the ground of acquittal. However, the trial Court dismissed the application through its impugned order dated 16.03.2009 on the sole ground that the prosecution filed Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009 aggrieved by the judgment passed by the trial Court, dated 19.02.2008, and the said Criminal Appeal is pending. Learned counsel further submitted that mere pendency of the Criminal Appeal is not a ground to dismiss the application and the impugned order passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside.

4. After perusal of the averments made by respondent No.2 in Crl.P.M.P.No.15473 of 2011, it reveals that the petitioner executed registered Agreement of Sale-cum- irrevocable General Power of Attorney bearing document Nos.2221 of 1997 and 2022 of 1997, dated 25.06.1997 in favour of M/s. A.S. Leasing and Finance Limited and the possession was also delivered. Subsequently, Sale Deed bearing document Nos.4516 and 4517 of 2003 have been executed in favour of respondent No.2 and the petitioner is not the owner of the said property.

5. This Court dismissed the Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009 and confirmed the judgment passed by the trial Court today i.e. 19.11.2025.

6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner is accused No.3 in C.C. 3 of 2003. It is not in dispute that the property of the petitioner was attached pursuant to the order passed by the trial Court vide order dated 21.11.2003 in Crl.M.P.No.1405 of 2003. The petitioner was acquitted pursuant to the judgment, dated 19.02.2008, passed by the trial Court in C.C. No.3 of 2003. Aggrieved by the above said judgment, the State filed Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009. This Court after hearing the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the appellant-State and the learned counsel for accused persons dismissed the Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009 and confirmed the judgment passed by the trial Court.

7. In the case on hand, the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner for raising attachment on 16.03.2009 only on the ground that the State filed the Appeal aggrieved by the judgment passed by the trial Court in C.C.No.3 of 2003 and due to the pendency of the Criminal Appeal, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought in this petition. It is relevant to mention that this Court dismissed the Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009 filed by the State on 19.11.2025 and confirmed the Judgment of the trial Court dated 19.02.2008.

8. By virtue of the judgment, dated 19.11.2025, in Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009, the impugned order passed by the trial Court in Crl.M.P.No.180 of 2009 is liable to be set asi