Allowed

Sagunthala v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC10 Jun 2016CRL RC(MD)/355/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench allowed a criminal revision petition challenging onerous conditions imposed in a custody order regarding disputed cash and jewelry. The court deleted the requirement for a solvency certificate and permitted the petitioner to retain cash expenditure rights provided she executed a bond.

What did the court decide?

Condition to produce solvency certificate deleted; revised conditions regarding custody of cash, recording of currency note numbers, and execution of personal bond ordered.

Sagunthala Vs the Inspector of Police — Property and Title | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.06.2016

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS

¶6

C.R.L.RC(MD) No.355 of 2016

¶7

Sagunthala ... Petitioner / Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

The Inspector of Police, T.Kallupatty Police Station, Madurai District. In Crime No.180/2015 ... Respondent / Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records and order in so far as conditions No.1 & 4 imposed in Crl.M.P.No.4273 of 2015 in Crime No.18 of 2015 on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur dated 02.12.2015.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.J.Chakkaravarthy

¶12

For Respondent : Mrs.S.Prabha Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

Aggrieved by certain alleged onerous condition issued in the property return order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur, Madurai District in Crl.M.P.No.4273 of 2015, petitioner has directed this revision.

¶15

2.In this case a mother-in-law named her son-in-law as accused. Mother-in-law alleged that her son-in-law is a cheat and in this connection a certain items of jewel and cash Rs.1,00,000/has become case-property. A property return petition was filed in Crl.M.P.No.4729 of 2015 by the son-in-law. There was a rival claim from the mother-in-law/defacto complainant in Crl.M.P.No.4273 of 2015. In a common order, the Magistrate accepted the request of mother-in-law and dismissed of the son-in-law's petition. The learned Magistrate while ordering interim custody imposed certain conditions.

¶16

The grievance of the revision petitioner is that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ learned Magistrate insisted upon producing solvency certificate issued by a Thasildar.

¶17

¶18

4.Incidentally, I could see one more condition which is

¶19

against common sense. It is with regard to cash Rs.1,00,000/-. In the facts and circumstances, sufficient conditions has also been imposed. The production of solvency certificate is superfluous and not necessary. The learned Judge has directed the revision petitioner to keep the cash as it is. It is a money. It requires to be used. It needs to be spent. Question of identity of currency notes will not arise. Of course, the currency number is to be recorded in the property register, if not already recorded.

¶20

5.In the result, ordered as under:

¶21

(1) This revision is allowed.

¶22

(2) The condition to produce solvency certificate issued by a

¶23

Thasildar is deleted.

¶24

(3) The currency note numbers of cash Rs.1,00,000/- shall be entered in the property register

¶25

(4) The cash shall be entrusted to the revision petitioner, who can spent it.

¶26

(5) She has to execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- which will be in the nature of indemnification affidavit.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(P&A)

¶29

/True copy/

¶30

Sub AssistantRegistrar

¶31

To:

¶32

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur.

¶33

2.The Government Advocate (Criminal Side) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶34

3.The Inspector of Police,

¶35

T.Kallupatty Police Station,

¶36

Madurai District.

¶37

+1cc to Mr.S.J.Chakkaravarthy, Advocate Sr.No.29387

¶38

sm:ARK-PV:17.06.2016:2P/5C

¶39

C.R.L.RC(MD) No.355 of 2016 10.06.2016

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sagunthala v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagunthala v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Karuppasamy @ Petchiyappan Vs K. Pandiswari

Vignesh Kumar Vs Indira

Ganesan Vs Muthu Buvaneswari

Shanmugam Vs the Inspector of Police

K.S.S.Raj Vs a.Muthumari

K. Malaisamy Vs the Inspector of Police