Allowed

Sakthivel v. the State Rep by

Madras HC28 Feb 2020CRL RC/355/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court set aside an order dismissing a petition for return of a seized tractor. Adhering to Supreme Court guidelines, the court directed the police to release the vehicle within seven days subject to a non-refundable deposit, personal bond, undertaking against illegal use, photograph submission, R.C. book surrender, and participation in the enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Released the seized tractor and trailer to the petitioner on payment of deposit, execution of bond, surrender of R.C. book, and undertaking against illegal use within 7 days.

Sakthivel Vs the State Rep by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 28.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

Crl.R.C.No.355 of 2020

¶6

Sakthivel

¶7

..Petitioner/Petitioner/Accused

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, Nagappattinam District.

¶10

(Crime No.10 of 2020)

¶11

..Respondent/Respondent/Complainant

¶12

Prayer:- This Petition is filed under section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.465 of 2020 on the file of District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam and set aside the same subsequently grant interim custody of Vehicle Tractor along with Trailor bearing registration No.TN 82 Y 3928.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Chinnaraj

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.K.Prabakar,

¶15

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This criminal revision has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated 11.02.2020 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagappattinam in Crl.M.P.No.465 of 2020.

¶18

2.The respondent police seized the vehicle viz., Tractor along with trailer bearing Registration No.TN 82 Y 3928 (belonging to the petitioner) for the alleged illegal sand mining and arrested the driver and registered a case in Crime No.10 of 2020 on 19.01.2020 under Sections 379 and 430 IPC read with Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. Seeking return of the vehicle, the petitioner, being the owner filed Crl.M.P.No.465 of 2020 before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam and the said petition was dismissed by order dated 11.02.2020, challenging which, the present petition has been filed.

¶19

1/3

¶20

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

¶21

3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State.

¶22

4.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no previous case against the petitioner nor this vehicle involved in any other case earlier. Though the reasons given by the trial Court in dismissing the petition cannot be faulted, yet, this Court is of the view that if the vehicle remains in the custody of the police indefinitely, it will get deteriorated.

¶23

In view of the guidelines given by the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat [(2002) 10 SCC 290], this Court is of the view that interests of justice will be served, if the vehicle is ordered to be released to the petitioner on certain stringent conditions. The respondent police is directed to grant interim custody of the said tractor bearing Registration No. TN 82 Y 3928 along with trailer to the petitioner within a period of 7 days from the date of compliance of the below mentioned conditions:

¶24

i. the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.75,000/(Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) before the jurisdictional Tahsildar as non-refundable deposit. After receipt of the above said amount,the same will have to be deposited by the Tahsildar, to the credit of the District Mines and Minerals Foundation trust as non-refundable deposit;

¶25

ii.the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam. The petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and give the copies of their Aadhaar Card;

¶26

iii.the petitioner shall give an undertaking before the respondent/ 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 respondent and also the trial Court, failing which the respondent/trial Court is at liberty to confiscate the vehicle;

¶27

2/3

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

v. the petitioner shall take photograph of the vehicle and submit the same along with Compact Disc duly certified under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872;

¶31

vi.the petitioner shall surrender the original R.C. book before the District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam. ; and

¶32

vii.the petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent.

¶33

viii. It is also made clear that after release of the vehicle on complying with the conditions imposed by this court, if the said vehicle is found to be involved in any of the offence, it is always open to the respondent to proceed further for confiscation.

¶34

ix.Petition relating to return of R.C. Book for any purpose in the future, may be filed before the District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, who may consider the same on merits.

¶35

By setting aside the order impugned herein, this petition

¶36

is allowed in the above terms.

¶37

Sd/Assistant Regitrar (C.S.VI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar

¶38

To:

¶39

1.The District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam.

¶40

2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, Nagappattinam District. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. +1cc to Mr.N.Chinnaraj, Advocate, SR.No.18020 AKM/11.03.2020 /3P-5C/ Crl.R.C.No.355 of 2020

¶41

3/3

¶42

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

Sakthivel v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakthivel v. the State Rep 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

Latha Vs K.a.Letha

R.Suresh Vs S.Rajasekaran(Deceased)

Thalapathi @ Bharath Vs State Rep. by

V.Vinoth Vs the State Rep. by

Sri Grama Devatha Kottai Vs The District Collector

Madhu Sudhan Varma @ Pala Kuru Madhu Sudhan Varma Vs State by