Allowed

Venkadesh v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC10 Nov 2020WP(MD)/15823/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted a writ of mandamus directing the release of the petitioner's seized lorry, held by police, subject to the execution of a bond, restrictions on alienation and use, and cooperation with further investigation.

What did the court decide?

Respondent to release the petitioner's lorry bearing registration TN 67 F 5599 forthwith subject to conditions including execution of a bond and restrictions on alienation and use of the vehicle.

Venkadesh Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.15823 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.11.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.15823 of 2020

¶7

Venkadesh ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur Revenue Division, Thanjavur.

¶10

2.The Assistant Director of Mines and Minerals, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶11

3.The Inspector of Police, Thanjavur Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's Ashok Leyland Lorry bearing registration number TN 67 F 5599 seized on 22.10.2020 and keeping under the custody of the third respondent by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2020.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Krishnan For Respondents : Mrs.M.Rajeswari Government Advocate

¶14

ORDER

¶15

(This petition was heard through video conferenceing)

¶16

This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus seeking for a direction to direct the respondents to release the petitioner's vehicle viz., Lorry bearing registration number TN 67 F 5599.

¶17

2.Mrs.M.Rajeswari, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶18

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

¶19

1/4

¶20

W.P.(MD) No.15823 of 2020

¶21

3.Heard Mr.S.Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.M.Rajeswari, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶22

4.It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the Lorry bearing registration number TN 67 F 5599. According to the petitioner, on 22.10.2020, the second respondent seized the vehicle and the third registered a case against the petitioner in Crime No.1151 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 alleging that the petitioner has transported sand without proper invoices. According to the petitioner, ever since the seizure, the said vehicle is still in the custody of the third respondent Police.

¶23

5.It is also the contention of the petitioner that the vehicle has also not been produced by the third respondent Police before the concerned Jurisdictional Court. According to him, the seized vehicle is now kept idle in the Police Station premises in the open place and exposed to the vagaries of nature, resulting in the vehicle depreciating in value. In such circumstances, he has filed this Writ Petition seeking for release of the seized vehicle.

¶24

6.According to the petitioner, he gave a representation to the second respondent on 28.10.2020 for releasing of the seized vehicle back to him. According to him, the second respondent failed to respond to the said representation. In such circumstances, he has filed this Writ Petition seeking for release of the seized vehicle.

¶25

7.Admittedly, the vehicle was seized by the third respondent on 22.10.2020 and a case has been registered by the third respondent Police against the petitioner in Crime No.1151 of 2020, for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation)Act, 1957 alleging that the petitioner has transported sand without proper invoices. Admittedly, the vehicle is now in the Police Station premises and kept in the open place and exposed to the vagaries of nature and the vehicle has also not been produced before the Jurisdictional Court.

¶26

8.As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the vehicle will certainly depreciate in value, if it is allowed to remain in the open place and kept idle for a long period of time. No useful purpose will be served if the vehicle is allowed to be kept idle. In similar matters, this Court has granted release of seized vehicle to the respective petitioners subject to fulfillment of certain conditions. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant similar relief to the petitioner subject to fulfillment of the following conditions:-

¶27

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

¶28

2/4

¶29

W.P.(MD) No.15823 of 2020

¶30

(i)the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) in favour of the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

(ii)the petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in question till the proceedings are completed.

¶32

(iii)the petitioner shall not change the colour and scheme of the vehicle.

¶33

(iv)the petitioner shall not use the vehicle for any illegal activities.

¶34

(v)before releasing the vehicle, the police authority shall take photographs of the vehicle at the cost of the petitioner.

¶35

(vi)The petitioner shall produce all xerox copies of the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicle to the first respondent.

¶36

(vii)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.

¶37

9.Upon completion of the above mentioned formalities, the respondents shall release the petitioner's Lorry bearing Registration No.TN 67 F 5599, to the petitioner forthwith and without any delay. If this undertaking given by the petitioner is breached, the petitioner will not be entitled for interim release of the vehicle in the future.

¶38

10.The Writ Petition is disposed of, accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

// True Copy //

¶40

gns

¶41

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶42

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

¶43

3/4

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.15823 of 2020

¶45

¶46

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur Revenue Division, Thanjavur. 2.The Assistant Director of Mines and Minerals, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶47

3.The Inspector of Police, Thanjavur Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur. +1 CC to M/s.GP ( SR-21901[F] dated 11/11/2020 )

¶48

W.P.(MD)No.15823 of 2020 10.11.2020

¶49

KM(CO) TR(20.11.2020) 4P 5C

¶50

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

¶51

4/4

Venkadesh v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkadesh v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

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

S.Noorjahan, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

V.Natarajan Vs the Assistant Executive

T.Vijay Vs the District Collector

K.Thanalakshmi, Vs the Principle District Judge

B. Ravi, S/O.Balusamy, Vs the Tamil Nadu Electricity

P.Arunpandi Vs the Assistant Director