Allowed

S.Saravanan v. the District Collector

Madras HC25 Apr 2019WP(MD)/10000/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed respondents to release the petitioner's seized lorry involved in illegal sand transport pending enquiry, subject to deposit of Rs.50,000, affidavit undertaking, and document production.

What did the court decide?

Release of seized vehicle on deposit of Rs.50,000, undertaking affidavit, document production, and cooperation with pending enquiry.

S.Saravanan Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.04.2019 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.10000 of 2019

S.Saravanan

... Petitioner

1.The District Collector, Collectorate Buildings, Sivagangai,

¶8

Sivagangai District.

¶9

2.The Assistant Director Mines and Minerals, Sivagangai,

¶10

Sivagangai District.

¶11

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

¶12

4.The Inspector of Police, Puluthipatty Police Station, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents considering the petitioner representation dated 10.04.2019 to direct the fourth respondent to release the petitioner's tipper lorry bearing registration No.TN 07 AD 8059 and entrust the same to the petitioner and pass orders by perusing all the documents submitted on the petitioner side.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Babu Jeganath For Respondents : Mr.K.Mu.Muthu Additional Government Pleader

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Heard the learned counsel on either side. By consent of both parties this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶17

2.The petitioner's vehicle was seized in connection with illegal transportation of sand. The enquiry in this regard is still pending. The learned counsel for the petitioner affirms before this Court that the petitioner's vehicle was not involved https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in any previous incident of sand theft or illegal transportation of sand.

¶18

¶19

3.The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is

¶20

placed on record. If this submission turns out to be false, the order now passed by this Court would stand automatically recalled and the petitioner will be visited with serious consequences. I am of the view that no purpose will be served by keeping the vehicle in question in the custody of the respondents. If the vehicle is kept in open space and exposed to sun light and rain, it would lose its value. Therefore, the respondents are directed to release the said vehicle subject to the following conditions.

¶21

a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust. He shall execute an affidavit of undertaking that he shall not involve in any offence in future that may lead to the seizure of the vehicle in question. The petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in question till the proceedings are completed.

¶22

b) The petitioner shall produce all the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicle.

¶23

c) This order for release of the vehicle can be pressed into service by the petitioner only if the vehicle is not in the custody of the criminal Court. If the vehicle is in the custody of concerned Criminal Court of appropriate jurisdiction, then, option is given to the petitioner to approach the concerned Judicial Magistrate to get release of the vehicle, by filing necessary application in the manner known to law.

¶24

d) As and when the respondents call for the vehicle for enquiry, the petitioner has to produce the vehicle in question and he shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

¶25

4.Upon completion of these formalities, the respondents shall

¶26

release the vehicle forthwith without any delay. If this undertaking given by the petitioner is breached, the petitioner will not be entitled to interim release of the vehicle in future.

¶27

5.The Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. No costs.

¶28

Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy //

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

¶31

1.The District Collector, Collectorate Buildings,

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶33

¶34

2.The Assistant Director Mines and Minerals, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶35

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

¶36

4.The Inspector of Police, Puluthipatty Police Station, Sivagangai District.

¶37

Copy to The Officer Incharge District Mineral Foundation Trust Sivagangai District

¶38

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-62877[F] dated 26/04/2019 )

¶39

+1 CC to M/s.R.BABU JAGANATH, Advocate ( SR-63232[F] dated 27/04/2019 ) rmk

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.10000 of 2019 25.04.2019

¶41

KM/(03.05.2019) 3P 8C

¶42

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

S.Saravanan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Saravanan v. the District Collector

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

Jeyaraj Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohammed Rafi Vs the Inspector of Police

Sundaravel Ramesh Vs the Passport Officer

M.Kaladevi Vs the Tahsildar

Sangili Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramajayam Vs the Inspector of Police