Allowed

Selvarasu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, K.Puduppatti

Madras HC7 Jul 2025CRL RC(MD)/644/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Owner sought interim custody of a JCB seized in an illegal mining case after the Magistrate rejected his application. The High Court allowed the revision, set aside the order and directed release on conditions including deposit, bond and undertaking.

What the court decided

AI extract

Selvarasu Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of… — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 07.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶7

Selvarasu ... Petitioner / Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, K.Pudupatti Police Station, Pudukottai District. 2.Shriram Transport Finance Co, Ltd., B/11, Colony main road, 12^th cross, Thillai Nagar, Trichy. (Crime No.02 of 2025) ... Respondent / Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS, to call for the records and set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.103 of 2025 by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam dated 22.04.2025 and release of interim custody of the excavotor (JCB) bearing registration No.TN-46-M-3901 seized by the 1^st respondent on 09.01.2025.

¶11

(Prayer amended as per the order of this Court dated 18.06.2025 in CRL.M.P.(MD)No.7619 of 2025 in CRL.RC.(MD)No.644 of 2025)

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

1/6

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For R-1 : Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate For R-2 : Mr.Ananth C. Rajesh

¶15

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed to call for the records and set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.103 of 2025 by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam dated 22.04.2025 and release of interim custody of the excavotor (JCB) bearing registration NO.TN-46-M-3901 seized by the 1^st respondent on 09.01.2025.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the JCB bearing Registration No. TN 46 M 3901. The said vehicle was seized by the respondent police in Cr.No.2 of 2025 for the offenses under Section 303(2) of BNS and 21(1), 21(2) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the same is in the custody of the respondent police. He further contended that the petitioner is the owner of the property, without the vehicle the petitioner unable to meet out his day to day affairs. Hence, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.103 of 2025 before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam, seeking interim custody of the vehicle.

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

2/6

¶21

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶22

The petitioner preferred this Criminal Revision Petition as against the order

¶23

dated 22.04.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.103 of 2025 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam, and to set aside the same.

¶24

Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.

¶25

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent Mr.S.S.Manoj, would fairly submit that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and he further categorically contended that this petition should not be allowed for the reason that the confiscation proceedings has already been initiated.

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the vehicle bearing Registration No. TN 46 M 3901 is owned by the petitioner and he was not involved in any such offence as alleged by the respondent and if the vehicle is kept in open place, the vehicle will get deteriorated and the value of the vehicle would automatically stand diminished and therefore interim custody may be granted to the petitioner.

¶27

Considering the fact that if the vehicle is kept in open place exposing to sun and rain, the value of the vehicle will be deteriorated and no purpose will be served in keeping the vehicle in custody, this Court is inclined to allow the revision and thereby setting aside the impugned order dated 22.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

3/6

¶29

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶30

103 of 2025 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam.

¶31

Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the order dated 22.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.103 of 2025 by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam, is hereby set aside and the vehicle viz., JCB bearing Registration No. TN 46 M 3901, is ordered to be returned to the petitioner for interim custody subject to the confiscation proceedings to be taken by the concern Department or by the Court on the following conditions:-

¶32

(a) the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) as non-refundable deposit for the said vehicle to the credit of the RAY OF LIGHT FOUNDATION, Bank Name: HDFC BANK, A/c No: 50100078904233, A/c Name: Ray of Light Foundation, Branch: HABIBULLAH ROAD, T NAGAR, CHENNAI, IFSC code: HDFC0001864 ;

¶33

(b) the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees Four

¶34

Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only), with two sureties for a likesum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam;

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

4/6

¶37

¶38

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶39

¶40

vehicle before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,

¶41

Thirumayam;

¶42

(d) 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, failing which the respondent/trial Court is at liberty to confiscate the vehicle;

¶43

(e)the petitioner shall not alienate and shall not make any alteration in the vehicle;

¶44

(f) the petitioner shall produce the vehicle before the Court and before the respondent police as and when required;

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

07.07.2025 (*)Corrected as per order of this Court dated 23/07/2025 made in Crl RC(MD). 644/2025

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

Assistant Registrar ( CS III)

¶49

// True Copy //

¶50

/08/2025 Sub Assistant Registrar (CS- I/ II / III / IV)

¶51

Sml

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

5/6

¶54

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶55

To:-

¶56

(*)To be substituted to the order already despatched on 13/08/2025

¶57

1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam.

¶58

2.The Inspector of Police, K.Pudupatti Police Station, Pudukottai District.

¶59

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶60

COPY TO: THE SECTION OFFICER, CRIMINAL RECORDS SECTION, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. (2 Copies)

¶61

+1 CC to M/s.ANANTH C.RAJESH, Advocate ( SR-41032[F] dated 08/07/2025 ) +1 CC to M/s.T.LENIN KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-41217[F] dated 08/07/2025 )

¶62

CRL RC(MD)No.644 of 2025

¶63

07.07.2025

¶64

CT (06/08/2025) 6 P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶65

JJ/02.09.2025 6 P/ 8C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶66

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶67

6/6

Selvarasu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, K.Puduppatti

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Selvarasu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, K.Puduppatti

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J.Sundaramoorthy Vs M.Pradeep Kumar

Mathiazhagan Vs B.Priyanka Pankajam IAS

Natarajan Vs Thennarasu

Sathishkumar Vs Velkumar

Sathishkumar Vs Velkumar

R. Nandhini Vs The State of Tamilnadu