Disposed

Manimaran v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC5 Mar 2019WP/5318/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking the release of a seized tipper lorry. The Court directed the respondents to release the vehicle within seven days subject to conditions, including deposit of security, execution of a bond, and undertaking not to use the vehicle for illegal activities.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release the vehicle within 7 days subject to payment of deposit, execution of bond with sureties, undertaking against illegal use, non-alienation of vehicle, and participation in enquiry.

Manimaran Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 05.03.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶7

Writ Petition No.5318 of 2019

¶8

Manimaran
S/o.Manimozhi ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Revenue Divisional Office,
Udaiyarpalayam Taluk,
Ariyalur District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Tahsildar Office,
Sendurai Taluk,
Ariyalur District.
3.The Sub Inspector of Police,
Erumbulikurichi Police Station,
Ariyalur District.
4.The Assistant Director,
Tamil Nadu Mines and Minerals,
Ariyalur and District. ... Respondents

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the TIPPER LORRY BEARING A REGISTRATION No.TN-28-M-3522 and hand over to petitioner based on his representation dated 14.02.2019 within the time framed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gandhi Kumar For Respondents : Mr.D.Raghu Government Advocate.

¶10

¶11

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

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

[Order was delivered by R.SUBBIAH,J]

¶14

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the TIPPER LORRY BEARING A REGISTRATION No.TN-28-M-3522 and hand over to petitioner based on his representation dated 14.02.2019.

¶15

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

¶16

According to the petitioner, the respondents have seized the vehicle in question on 22.09.2018 on the ground of illegal carrying 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

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):

¶20

(i)The 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.

¶21

(ii)The 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.

¶22

(iii)The petitioner shall give an undertaking before the respondents/authority concerned stating that he will not use

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
dpq
To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Revenue Divisional Office,
Udaiyarpalayam Taluk,
Ariyalur District.
2. The Tahsildar,
Tahsildar Office,
Sendurai Taluk,
Ariyalur District.
3. The Sub Inspector of Police,
Erumbulikurichi Police Station,
Ariyalur District.
4. The Assistant Director,
Tamil Nadu Mines and Minerals,
Ariyalur and District.
+1 cc to Mr.K.Gandhikumar, Advocate, S.R.No.20253
+1 cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.19992

¶29

Writ Petition No.5318 of 2019

¶30

NA(CO) SSM(07/03/2019)

¶31

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

Manimaran v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manimaran 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Suresh Vs The District Collector

S.Narayanaswamy Vs The District Collector

Ashok Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer/ Sub Collector

S.Gopalakrishnan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

G.Suresh Vs State rep. by the

R.Arumugam Vs The Divisional Revenue Officer