Allowed

R.Elangovan v. State by

Madras HC2 Sept 2020CRL RC/634/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed criminal revision, set aside District and Sessions Court order denying interim custody of seized vehicle, and directed police to release Mahindra Tractor on conditions including deposit, bond, and undertaking against illegal activities.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; respondent police directed to release vehicle within 7 days on specified conditions with deposit and bond.

R.Elangovan Vs State by — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 02.09.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.R.C.No.634 of 2020

R.Elangovan

...Petitioner/

owner of the vehicle

Vs.

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Kilvelur Police Station, Nagapattinam District. (Crime No.324 of 2020) ...Respondent/Complainant

¶11

Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. seeking to set aside the order dated 29.06.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1534 of 2020 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Nagapattinam and to direct the respondent to return the petitioner's vehicle (Mahindra Tractor with Tipper) bearing Registration No.TN-50-Z-8595 seized in Crime No.324 of 2020 on the file of the respondent/police.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthamizh Selvakumar For Respondent : Mrs.P.Kritika Kamal Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This case is taken up through video conferencing.

¶15

This criminal revision has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated 29.06.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1534 of 2020 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Nagapattinam and to direct the respondent to return the petitioner's vehicle (Mahindra Tractor with Tipper) bearing Registration No.TN-50-Z-8595 seized in Crime No.324 of 2020 on the file of the respondent/police.

¶16

The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle (Mahindra Tractor with Tipper) bearing Registration No.TN-50-Z-8595, which was seized on 05.04.2020, while transporting one unit of river sand and a case was registered in Crime No.324 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 379 and 430 IPC and Section 21(1) of the

¶17

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

¶18

Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.1534 of 2020 before the District and Sessions Court, Nagapattinam, under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for interim custody of the vehicle, which was dismissed on 29.06.2020, challenging which, the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition.

¶19

Heard Mr.P.Muthamizh Selvakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.P.Kritika Kamal, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent/State.

¶20

It is seen that the seizure was effected on 05.04.2020 and the vehicle is in the police station open to sun and rain.

¶21

Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and in view of the guidelines given by the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat¹ , 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 vehicle (Mahindra Tractor with Tipper) bearing Registration No.TN-50-Z-8595 to the petitioner within a period of 7 days from the date of compliance of the below mentioned condition Nos.(i) to (iii) :

¶22

(i) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- 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, Nagapattinam as non-refundable deposit;

¶23

(ii) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the District and Sessions Court, Nagapattinam. The petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and give the copies of their Aadhaar Card;

¶24

1(2002) 10 SCC 290

¶25

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

¶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

(iv) The petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in
question till the disposal of the proceedings
before the authority concerned;
(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;
(vi) The petitioner shall surrender the original R.C.
book before the District and Sessions Court,
Nagapattinam; and
(vii) The petitioner is also directed to participate in
the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent.

¶28

Petition relating to return of R.C. Book for any purpose in the future, may be filed before the District and Sessions Court, Nagapattinam, who may consider the same on merits, though this order has been passed by the High Court.

¶29

This petition is allowed in the above terms and the order dated 29.06.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1534 of 2020 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Nagapattinam, is set aside.

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

1.The District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam.

¶34

2.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Nagapattinam District.

¶35

3.The District Mines and Minerals Foundation Trust, Nagapattinam District.

¶36

4.The Tahsildar, Kilvelur Taluk, Nagapattinam.

¶37

5.The Inspector of Police, Kilvelur Police Station, Nagapattinam District. 6.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai – 600 104. Crl.R.C.No.634 of 2020 NR(CO) RV(28/10/2020)

¶38

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

R.Elangovan v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Elangovan v. State 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

S.Maheswari Vs State Represented by

K.Kalaivani Vs State by

R.Kirbavathi, Vs State Rep. by

Manikandan Vs State Rep. by

Selvi Vs State Rep.by

Jestinraj Vs State Rep.by Its