BADI SRINIVASA RAO Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this Criminal Revision Case is to the order, dated 19.08.2019, in Crl.M.P. No.1131 of 2019 in Crime No.178 of 2019 of Gudlavalleru Police Station, Krishna district, registered for the offences under Section 379 IPC and Sections 27 and 35 of A.P. Water, Land and Trees Act, 2007 ('for short, the AP WALTA Act') wherein and where under, the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Gudivada (for short, 'the trial Court'), dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner/3rd party under Section 451 Cr.P.C. seeking interim custody of the seized tipper lorry bearing No.AP16 TP 3569.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the 1st respondent-State.

(3.) As can be seen, the trial Court dismissed the petition mainly on the observation that Section 38(4) of AP WALTA Act has no application because the petitioner failed to prove that the tipper lorry in question was used without his knowledge or connivance. The Court observed that though in the mediators report accused No.2, who is the driver of the petitioner, confessed that he transported the clay without the knowledge of the owner but he further stated that he obtained possession of the lorry from the petitioner, who is his owner. The Court further held that no owner will part with the vehicle without knowing the purpose for which the vehicle is taken and therefore the petitioner's contention that he had no knowledge about the purpose for which his driver took the vehicle is untenable and dismissed the petition.