Allowed

Udhayakumar v. State Rep. by Its

Madras HC1 Jul 2020CRL RC/555/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition, the High Court of Madras set aside the lower court's order refusing the return of the petitioner's Tipper lorry involved in illegal sand transport. The Court allowed the revision pending initiation of confiscation proceedings, subject to bond submission and other assurances.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order setting aside the lower court objection to return of lorry was allowed with conditions—affidavit of non-use, deposit of RC, security of Rs. 25,000, and production of vehicle when re

Udhayakumar Vs State Rep. by Its — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.07.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTIC E G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.R.C.No.555 of 2020

¶6

Udhayakumar, S/o.Nagarajan, No.2-114, Sithanallur, Semangalam, Tiruvarur ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Kilvelur Police Station, Nagapattinam. (Crime No.56 of 2020) ...Respondent

¶8

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C to call for the records and set aside the order dated 03.03.2020 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam in Crl.M.P.No.750 of 2020 in Crime No.56 of 2020 and to return the Tipper lorry bearing Registration No.TN-20-BX-1616, Chassis No.FNE657657 and Engine No.FNE101810Z to the custody of the petitioner.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Palanivel For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

¶10

This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed against the order dated 03.03.2020 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam in C.M.P.No.750 of 2020, filed by the petitioner seeking for return of his Tipper lorry.

¶11

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the owner of the Tipper lorry and the said vehicle was involved in illegal transport of one unit of sand. Hence the complaint.

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the confiscation proceedings has not commenced and now the

¶13

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

¶14

Tipper lorry is exposed to rain and shine and if the Tipper lorry is kept in the police station continuously, it will lose all its worth. The learned counsel further submitted that any stringent conditions can be imposed by this Court and the petitioner will comply with the said conditions.

¶15

Per contra, Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that if the Tipper lorry is released, the petitioner will once again involve in the illegal transportation of sand. He further submitted that the petitioner had already committed the similar offence which was registered by the respondent police. He concluded his arguments by submitting that even though confiscation proceedings have not been commenced, this Court has to take a very stringent stand, when it comes to release of the vehicle involved in sand theft, which has a direct impact in the natural resources.

¶16

Heard Mr.N.Palanivel learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the orders passed by the Court below.

¶17

The petitioner is the owner of the Tipper lorry and according to the petitioner, the Tipper lorry now exposed to the open sky in the police station and it will become worthless over a period of time. Admittedly, the confiscation proceedings have not commenced. The petitioner also undertakes that he will not involve in any illegal activity in future and that any stringent conditions can be imposed by this Court.

¶18

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Court below in Crl.M.P.No.750 of 2020, dated 03.03.2020 is hereby set aside and this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed with the following conditions:

¶19

(i) The petitioner shall file an affidavit before the Court below that the Tipper lorry will not be used for the illegal transportation of sand in future.

¶20

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit the original RC book before the Court below and the Court below shall certify the deposit of the original RC book in the Court and such certificate can be produced by the petitioner if and when he is asked to produce the RC book by the police during any interception.

¶21

(iii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the District Minerals Foundation

¶22

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

¶23

Trust and shall produce the said receipt before the Court below.

¶24

(iv) The petitioner shall produce the vehicle, as and when required before the Court below.

¶25

This order is passed without prejudice to the rights of the respondent to initiate confiscation proceedings against the petitioner.

¶26

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar

¶27

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rst
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Kilvelur Police Station,
Nagapattinam.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court,
Madras.
Crl.R.C.555 of 2020
SV-I(CO)
RN(22/07/2020)

¶28

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

Udhayakumar v. State Rep. by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udhayakumar v. State Rep. by Its

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

P.S.Karthikeyan Vs State Represented by

Sumathi Vs the State Rep by Its

Selvam Suntharamoorthy Vs State Rep. by

Mariappan Vs the State through

Ashkar Ali Vs State Rep by

Rajkumar Vs the State Rep by Its