Allowed

Praveen Raj v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC26 Aug 2019WP/24749/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the release of a seized tipper lorry used for transporting sand. The order imposed five strict conditions, including a non-refundable deposit of Rs. 50,000, a personal bond with sureties, and an undertaking not to use the vehicle for illegal activities pending inquiry disposal.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release the seized vehicle within 7 days subject to deposit of Rs. 50,000, execution of bond, and undertaking to participate in inquiry.

Praveen Raj Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 26.08.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH and

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

Writ Petition No.24749 of 2019

¶7

Praveen Raj S/o.Panchamurthi ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Revenue Divisional Office,
Chidambaram.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Kumaratchi Police Station,
Chidambaram Taluk. ... Respondents

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent to release the Petitioner's Tipper Lorry bearing No. TN-23, AX-1845 which was seized by the Second Respondent on 09.07.2019 and keeping under the custody of the Second Respondent by consider the Petitioner's representation dated 07.08.2019.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Balakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Suresh Government Advocate

¶11

Petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent to release the Petitioner's Tipper Lorry bearing No. TN-23, AX-1845 which was seized by the Second Respondent on 09.07.2019 and keeping under the custody of the Second Respondent by consider the Petitioner's representation dated 07.08.2019.

¶12

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

¶13

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Advocate for respondents.

¶14

According to petitioner, respondents have seized the vehicle in question on 09.07.2019 on the ground of illegal carrying 2 Unit of Sand and till date, no order for release of the said vehicle had been passed by the respondents. Hence, he has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

¶15

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Government Advocate for respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of mines and minerals like 2 Unit of Sand and hence, the vehicle was seized. He would further submit that petitioner has no previous case.

¶16

In any event, as the vehicle is under the custody of the respondents from the date of seizure and considering the fact that if the same is allowed to be kept idle by exposing the same to rain and shine, it would certainly diminish their value, this Court is of the view that the vehicle in question may be released by imposing conditions on the petitioner.

¶17

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to release the vehicle in question to the petitioner within a period of 7 days from the date of compliance of the below mentioned condition Nos.(i) to (iii):

¶18

(i)Petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) before the jurisdictional Tahsildar concerned as non-refundable deposit. After receipt of the above said amount, the same will have to be deposited by the jurisdictional Tahsildar concerned, to the credit of the District Mines and Minerals Foundation Trust as non-refundable deposit.

¶19

(ii)Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate.

¶20

(iii)Petitioner shall give an undertaking before the respondents/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 the respondents and also the trial Court, failing which the respondents/trial Court is/are at liberty to confiscate the vehicle.

¶21

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

¶22

(iv)Petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in question till the disposal of the proceedings before the authority concerned.

¶23

(v)Petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

¶24

With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶25

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ebsi
To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Revenue Divisional Office,
Chidambaram.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Kumaratchi Police Station,
Chidambaram Taluk.
+1cc to Mr.N.Balakrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.72377
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.73417
Writ Petition No.24749 of 2019
RSV(CO)
CS/05/09/2019

¶26

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

Praveen Raj v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Raj v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Govindan Vs v. Bhavanandhi

S.Benjamin Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

M.Seenivasan Vs The Assistant Director

R.Vijayan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Venkatesan Vs The District Revenue Officer

Dhanapal, Vs The District Revenue Officer