KANNEPOGU RAMULU Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is filed by the petitioner/Accused No. 1 owner of the vehicle under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. aggrieved by the order dated 14.05.2014 in Crl. M.P. No. 1235 of 2014 in Crime No. 275/2014 of Khanapuram Haveli Police Station, Khammam District registered for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act under which the petition under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class (Excise), Khammam.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that the petitioner is the owner of the auto bearing No. AP 20 TB 6112 and the same was seized by the Khanapuram Haveli police in connection with a case in Crime No. 275 of 2014 under cover of panchanama dated 28.04.2014 for the offence punishable under the above section of law for which the accused No. 1 being the owner of the vehicle filed the petition in Crl. M.P. No. 1235 of 2014 under Section 457 Cr.P.C. praying to release the vehicle. The grounds urged in the said petition that he is depending on the income by driving the auto only and there is no other source of income except running the crime vehicle which the police seized. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petition on the ground that the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition as the offence is under Excise Act.

(3.) THE learned Public Prosecutor opposed the revision petition stating the learned trial Magistrate is correct in his observation on want of jurisdiction to entertain the application and it makes no difference of the crime registered is by police or excise or forest or other officials and thus there is nothing for this Court to interfere by sitting in revision and sought for dismissal.