S.Muthukrishnan vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By on 26 February, 2026

    0
    37
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Madras High Court

    S.Muthukrishnan vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By on 26 February, 2026

    Author: Mohammed Shaffiq

    Bench: Mohammed Shaffiq

                                                                                              CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025
    
    
                              BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
    
                                                       Dated : 26.02.2026
    
                                                              CORAM
    
                             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
    
                                                CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025
    
                         S.Muthukrishnan,                                                      ... Petitioner
    
                                                             Vs.
                         1. State of Tamilnadu Rep by
                         Inspector of Police,
                         Peraiyur, Police Station,
                         Madurai District.
                         Crime No.102/2025.
    
    
                         2. Shriram Finance Limited,
                         Kallikudi Taluk,
                         Madurai District.
    
                         3. Mandra Moorthi,
    
                         4. Mohan,                                                          ... Respondents
    
                         PRAYER :- Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 438 r/w.442
                         of BNSS, 2023 to set aside the impugned order passed in Cr.MP.No.
                         2870/2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur dated
                         04.11.2025 and allow the Criminal Revision Petition.
    
                         1/11
    
    
    
    
    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis               ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
                                                                                              CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025
    
    
                           For Petitioner       : Mr.K. Rajeshwaran,
    
                           For Respondents : Mr.C.Jeganathan for R3
    
                                                : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate for R1
    
                                               : Mr.M.Kannan for R2
    
                                               : Mr.S.I.Muthiah for R4
    
                                                               ORDER
    

    Heard Mr.K. Rajeshwaran, learned Counsel for Revision

    Petitioner, Mr.P.Kottaichamy, learned Government Advocate for first

    SPONSORED

    respondent, Mr.M.Kannan, learned counsel for second respondent,

    Mr.C.Jeganathan, learned counsel for third respondent, and

    Mr.S.I.Muthiah, learned counsel for fourth respondent.

    2. The present Criminal Revision case has been filed to set aside the

    order of Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur, dated 04.11.2025 in

    Cr.M.P.No.2870 of 2025, whereby petition under Sections 497 & 503 of

    BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., JCB bearing registration

    No.TN-22-CW-9137, was rejected on the premise that if the said vehicle

    is handed over to petitioner, vehicle may be sold or altered without being

    produced for trial.

    2/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    3. Mr.K. Rajeshwaran, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner

    would submit that petitioner is owner of the aforesaid vehicle. The said

    vehicle was seized by the Respondent Police and a case was registered in

    Crime No.102 of 2025, for offence punishable under section 303(2) of

    BNS and Section 4(A)(1A) r/w. 21(5) of Mines and Minerals

    (Development & Regulation) Act, alleging that petitioner’s vehicle was

    involved in the illegal transportation of sand. Petitioner has filed

    Cr.MP.No.2870 of 2025 before Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur, to

    grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was

    dismissed by Court below by impugned order dated 04.11.2025 for the

    reasons stated supra. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed.

    4. Learned Counsel for Petitioner would further submit that the

    R.C book remains in the name of Mandra Moorthi/ third respondent;

    third respondent obtained a loan from second respondent and in default

    of payment, vehicle was sold to fourth respondent, who in turn, sold the

    vehicle to petitioner. Both third and fourth respondent had filed

    affidavits, wherein they have stated that they have no objection in

    3/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    transferring the ownership in favour of the petitioner and handing over

    custody of the vehicle to the petitioner. Petitioner submits that he is the

    owner of the said vehicle and would abide by any conditions that may be

    imposed by this Court.

    5. Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side)

    appearing for respondent, would submit that Registration Certificate of

    the subject vehicle is in the name of third respondent and on default of

    payment of loan, vehicle was sold to fourth respondent, who in turn,

    sold the vehicle to petitioner. In this regard, the Police had enquired with

    both the respondents 3 and 4, who are erstwhile owners, who had

    expressed that they have no objection to the transfer of ownership as well

    as possession in favour of the petitioner. He would further submit that

    the said vehicle may be released subject to conditions including in case,

    confiscation proceedings are being initiated, petitioner must co-operate

    and the same was agreed to by learned counsel for Revision Petitioner.

    4/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    6. Before proceeding further, it may be relevant to refer to

    provisions of Sections 497 and 503 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

    Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which reads as follows:-

    “497. Order for custody and disposal of property pending
    trial in certain cases.-When any property is produced before
    any Criminal Court during any inquiry or trial, the Court may
    make such order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such
    property pending the conclusion of the inquiry or trial, and, if
    the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is
    otherwise expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording
    such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to be sold or
    otherwise disposed of.

    Explanation.- For the purposes of this section,” property”

    includes-

    (a) property of any kind or document which is produced
    before the Court or which is in its custody,

    (b) any property regarding which an offence appears to have
    been committed or which appears to have been used for the
    commission of any offence.

    (2) The Court or the Magistrate shall, within a period of
    fourteen days from the production of the property referred to
    in sub-section (1) before it, prepare a statement of such
    property containing its description in such form and manner
    as the State Government may, by rules, provide.

    (3)The Court or the Magistrate shall cause to be taken the
    photograph and if necessary, videograph on mobile phone or
    any electronic media, of the property referred to in sub-section

    5/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    (1).

    (4)The statement prepared under sub-section (2) and the
    photograph or the videography taken under sub-section (3)
    shall be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other
    proceeding under the Sanhita.

    (5)The Court or the Magistrate shall, within a period of thirty
    days after the statement has been prepared under sub-section
    (2) and the photograph or the videography has been taken
    under sub-section (3), order the disposal, destruction,
    confiscation or delivery of the property in the manner
    specified hereinafter.

    503. Procedure by police upon seizure of property.-(1)
    Whenever the seizure of property by any police officer is
    reported to a Magistrate under the provisions of this Code,
    and such property is not produced before a Criminal Court
    during an inquiry or trial, the Magistrate may make such order
    as he thinks fit respecting the disposal of such property or the
    delivery of such property to the person entitled to the
    possession thereof, or if such person cannot be ascertained,
    respecting the custody and production of such property.
    (2) If the person so entitled is known, the Magistrate may
    order the property to be delivered to him on such conditions
    (if any) as the Magistrate thinks fit and if such person is
    unknown, the Magistrate may detain it and shall, in such case,
    issue a proclamation specifying the articles of which such
    property consists, and requiring any person who may have a
    claim thereto, to appear before him and establish his claim
    within six months from the date of such proclamation.”

    6/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal

    Desai vs State of Gujarat, reported in AIR 2003 SC 638, held as under:-

    “17. In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no
    use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations
    for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass
    appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate
    bond and guarantee as well as security for return of
    the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This
    can be done pending hearing of application for return
    of such vehicles.

    ……..

    21. However these powers are to be exercised by the
    concerned Magistrate. We hope and trust that the concerned
    Magistrate would take immediate action for seeing that
    powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. Are properly and promptly
    exercised and articles are not kept for a long time at the
    police station, in any case, for not more than fifteen days to
    one month. This Object can also be achieved if there is
    proper supervision by the Registry of the concerned High
    Court in seeing that the rules framed by the High Court with
    regard to such articles are implemented properly.”

    8. It may also be relevant to note that mere pendency of

    confiscation proceedings before the Collector is no bar to release the

    vehicle.1 The same view was taken by the Allahabad High Court that

    pendency of confiscation proceedings shall not operate as bar against the

    release of vehicle seized under Section 60 of Excise Act2.

    1.Jai Prakash Vs. State of U.P., 1992 AWC 1744

    2.Kamaljeet Singh Vs. State of U.P., 1986 U.P. Cri. Ruling 50 (Alld)

    7/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    9. Keeping in view that the law laid down by the Supreme Court

    and the documents/facts which would prima facie show that Revision

    Petitioner is the lawful owner of seized vehicle, this Court takes judicial

    notice that if vehicle in the present case is allowed to be kept in custody

    and in open yard, it will be exposed to vagaries of weather, resulting in

    diminishing its value and may in course of time be reduced to scrap.

    10. In view thereof, impugned order dated 04.11.2025 passed by

    Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur, in Crl.M.P.No.2870 of 2025, is set

    aside and the seized vehicle viz.,JCB bearing registration No.TN-22-

    CW-9137, insofar as it relates to Crime No.102 of 2025, is directed to be

    released to petitioner subject to the following conditions:

    (i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.

    1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties each for a like sum

    to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur.

    (ii) Vehicle shall be released after preparing a video and still

    photographs of the vehicle and after obtaining all information/documents

    necessary for identification of the vehicle.

    8/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    (iii) Petitioner shall not sell or part with the ownership of the

    vehicle till conclusion of the trial and shall furnish an undertaking to the

    trial court that he shall surrender the vehicle within one week of being so

    directed.

    (iv) Petitioner shall give an undertaking before

    respondent/authority concerned stating that he will not use the vehicle in

    question for any illegal activities in future and shall produce the same as

    and when required by respondent Police and also the trial Court, failing

    which the respondent/trial Court is/are at liberty to confiscate the vehicle.

    (v) Petitioner undertakes to co-operate in confiscation proceedings,

    if any, initiated/to be initiated.

    (vi) Petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be

    conducted by the respondent Police.

    (vii) Petitioner is directed to effect the name transfer of vehicle

    within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on

    such transfer, Petitioner shall surrender the original R.C. Book before

    Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur, failing which the order passed by this

    Court stands vacated.

    9/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    (viii) Petition relating to return of R.C. Book for any purpose in the

    future may be filed before Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur who may

    consider the same on merits, though this order has been passed by the

    High Court.

    11. This Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of in the above

    terms.

    26.02.2026
    LS

    TO

    1. The Judicial Magistrate Court,
    Peraiyur

    2.The Inspector of Police,
    Peraiyur Police Station,
    Madurai District.

    3. Shriram Finance Limited,
    Kallikudi Taluk,
    Madurai District.

    4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
    Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
    Madurai.

    10/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
    CRL RC(MD). No.1586 of 2025

    MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ,J.

    LS

    CRL RC(MD) No.1586 of 2025

    26.02.2026

    11/11

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here