Criminal revision petition challenging the order imposing conditions for returning a hypothicated lorry. The Single Judge found no illegality in the imposed monetary deposit and obligations and dismissed the petition.
The criminal revision case was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.207 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.R.C.(MD)No.207 of 2022
Murugesan
... Petitioner
Vs.
Inspector of Police,
Sivagangai District.
Its through Manager, No.174, 10th Cross Street, Trichy District. ... Respondents
Prayer: This Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. to call for the records relating to the order dated 22.11.2021 made in Cr.M.P.No.4196 of 2021 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai and set aside the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.G.Arun Kumar
For R1 : Mrs.M.Aasha Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The criminal revision case has been filed to set aside the order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, in Cr.M.P.No.4196 of 2021, dated 22.11.2021.
2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court below imposed onerous condition while returning the lorry.
3.The Court below while returning the lorry imposed the following conditions:
'1.The petitioner shall deposit the certified copy of registration Certificate of the vehile;
2.the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/before this Court, in Crl.M.P.No.4196/2021, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
3.that the petitioner/accused has to give an https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ undertaking that the petitioner is directed to
1/3
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.207 of 2022
produce the original R.C.Book after his hypothication;
4.Further informed that this alleged offending vehicle hypothicated with the second respondent/Finance company is liable for confiscated proceedings as the case may be;
5.The petitioner shall not make any alteration of the vehicle;
6.The petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle;
7.The petitioner shall produce the same before the Court as and when required until final order is passed in the confiscation proceedings;
8.The petitioner/owner of the vehicle should take photos with different angles of the concerned vehicle and it should be certified by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/owner of the vehicle along with the petitioner/owner of the vehicle on the back of the photos and shall be submitted before the concerned Court; and
9.That the petitioner / owner of the vehicle shall not take the vehicle outside the District without the permission of the Court and the petitioner/owner of the vehicle should produce the vehicle when the Court directs him.'
4.It is seen that the Court below directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1 lakh while releasing his vehicle. It is not a non-refundable deposit.
5.This Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the Court below. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is dismissed.
/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
lr
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented
2/3
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.207 of 2022
is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Ulagampatti Police Station, Sivagangai District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.R.C.(MD)No.207 of 2022 02.03.2022
RD(21.03.2022) 3P 4C
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the conditions imposed by the Court below while returning the seized lorry to the petitioner were illegal or infirm.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Murugesan
State rep by the Inspector of Police
Sakthi Finance Ltd.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
