Dismissed

Varadhammal v. State by

Madras HC7 Jan 2019CRL RC/16/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed the Criminal Revision challenging the refusal to return a vehicle seized in illegal sand mining. The Court dismissed the petition but remitted it to the Magistrate with liberty to file a fresh application based on the Division Bench's modified order of 29.10.2018, which had subtly altered the earlier interim stay.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with liberty to approach the learned Judicial Magistrate and file a fresh petition invoking the modified Division Bench order of 29.10.2018.

Varadhammal Vs State by — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.01.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. V. PARTHIBAN

¶5

Crl.RC.No.16 of 2019

¶6

Varadhammal ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs. State by the Inspector of Police, Palur Police Station, Kancheepuram District. Cr.No.09 of 2018 ... Respondent

¶8

Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, against the order dated 30.10.2018 made in CMP.No.1223 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu, refusing to deliver the interim custody of the vehicle involved in the above said crime number for the offence under Sections 430, 379 of IPC read with 21(1) of MM Act.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Arun Kumar For Respondent : Mr. Harihara Arun Somasankar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) O R D E R

¶10

This present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 30.10.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu in C.M.P.No.1223 of 2018, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner herein under Section 457 of Cr.P.C seeking return of vehicle, which was involved in the offence under Sections 430, 379 of IPC read with 21(1) of MM Act.

¶11

2.According to the learned Magistrate, the Division Bench of this Court in WP(MD).No.7595 of 2018 (Mahalingam Vs. The secretary of Govt. Public Works Department, Secretariat, Chennai and others), dated 24.09.2018 has made an interim order that no Courts shall entertain any request for return of vehicle, which was involved in illegal sand mining. The Division Bench of this Court had passed the order on 24.09.2018 and on the basis of which the petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected.

¶12

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

¶13

3.However, on the day when the learned Judicial Magistrate had passed the order dated 30.10.2018, the Division Bench of this Court has modified its own order and subsequently passed directions on 29.10.2018 directing the return of vehicle by imposing certain conditions.

¶14

4.Unfortunately, the modified order has not been brought to the notice to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Chengalpattu. In any event, pursuant to the final order in the above said writ petition, the petitioner herein should be given liberty to file a fresh petition.

¶15

5.In view of the same, the Criminal Revision Petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and appraise about the modified order dated 29.10.2018, in W.P.(MD) Nos.22023 to 22026 of 2018 etc., passed by the Division Bench of this Court, in the aforesaid writ petition and seek appropriate remedy. The learned Judicial Magistrate shall consider the petition on merits and in accordance with law and pass suitable orders on such petition being filed by the petitioner herein.

¶16

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
klt/msk
To
1) The Judicial Magistrate, NO.I,
Kancheepuram District
2) The Inspector of Police,
Palur Police Station,
Kancheepuram District.
3) The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras
+1 cc Mr.D.R.Arun Kumar, Advocate, SR No.1648
Crl.R.C.No.16 of 2019
ssm(08/01/2019)

¶17

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

Varadhammal v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varadhammal v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Krishnaveni Vs M/S.Indian Overseas Bank

N.Gurunathan, Aged 36 Years Vs State Rep. by

P.Panchavarnam Vs R.Lakshmi

S.R.Neraj Vs D.Gunasekaran

R.Shobha Vs Rajeswari

R.Shobha Vs Rajeswari