R.Samraj v. State by
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court admitted a criminal revision to set aside an order and seek the return of a seized vehicle. The petitioner withdrew the petition. The court dismissed the petition, leaving it open for the actual owner to challenge the lower court order.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed; petitioner allowed to withdraw; owner of vehicle left free to challenge lower order.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.02.2020
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
Criminal Revision Case No.70 of 2020
R.Samraj
... Petitioner/Petitioner
State By: The Inspector of Police, Thittacherry Police Station, Nagapattinam District
(Crime No.3 of 2019) ... Respondent/Complainant
Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with 401 Cr.P.C, to set-aside the order, dated 27.11.2019 passed in Crl.M.P.No.3597 of 2019, on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam and further direct the respondent to return the petitioner's vehicle bearing No.TN49-AB-4879, Tata ACE, seized in Crime No.3 of 2019 on the file of the respondent / Police.
For Petitioner : Mr. P.Muthamizh Selvakumar For Respondent : Mr. K.Prabakar, APP. O R D E R
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.Samraj
- respondent
State By: The Inspector of Police, Thittacherry Police Station, Nagapattinam District
Coram
R. MAHADEVAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court