Dismissed

Srinath Arumugam v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

Madras HC5 Jan 2026CRL RC/2893/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought return of his mobile phone and laptop seized during investigation of a cheating case. Both gadgets were in the custody of the forensic science laboratory awaiting analysis. Revision dismissed with direction to obtain lab report within four weeks; petitioner may renew application before Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed; respondent directed to obtain FSL report within four weeks; petitioner may renew application for return of gadgets before the Magistrate.

Srinath Arumugam Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Crl.R.C.No.2893 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 05.01.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶6

Crl.R.C.No.2893 of 2025

¶7

Srinath Arumugam Aged about 40 years S/o.Mr.Arumugam, Flat No.F3, I Floor, Sunil Shrivari Apartment, No.13, Ranganathan Street, Ranganathan Street, Chennai – 42.

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Tambaram, Chengalpattu District, Crime No.7 of 2025 ...Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Criminal Revision case filed under Section 438 r/w Section 442 of BNSS, to call for the records and to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tambaram in Crl.M.P.No.2121 of 2025 dated 18.06.2025 and direct the respondent police to return the GOOGLE PIXEL A(Black colour) Mobile Phone and DELL NEW ALIENWARE (Light Sky Blue Colour) Laptop to the petitioner, seized in connection with Crime No.7 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police pending disposal of the case.

¶12

1/4

¶13

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

¶14

Crl.R.C.No.2893 of 2025

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Joel For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The petitioner challenges the dismissal of the petitioner's application

¶18

for return of his mobile phone and laptop, which was seized during the course of investigation in Crime No.7 of 2025 registered for the offences under Section 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS Act, 2023, in which the petitioner is an accused.

¶19

2.The petitioner is said to have committed the aforesaid offences by using the laptop and the mobile phone. The petitioner sought for return of

¶20

the said gadgets and the same was dismissed by the Magistrate on 23.09.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.2121 of 2025.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the seizure

¶22

was made in the month of April, 2025; that the gadgets are still lying idle and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the interim custody of the said gadgets.

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.R.C.No.2893 of 2025

¶26

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) would

¶27

submit since the offence was committed by using the two gadgets, they have been sent to the forensic science laboratory for analysis and the report is still awaited.

¶28

5.In view of the above statement, this Court is of the view that the gadgets cannot be returned as both the mobile phone and the laptop are now in the custody of the forensic science laboratory. The respondent shall ensure that the lab report is obtained within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The petitioner may renew his application before the learned Magistrate once the report is obtained and the said application may be considered by the learned Magistrate on its own merits.

¶29

6.With the above observations, the Revision is dismissed.

¶30

05.01.2026

¶31

Tsg

¶32

Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No

¶33

3/4

¶34

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

¶35

Crl.R.C.No.2893 of 2025

SUNDER MOHAN.J.,

Tsg

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tambaram

¶40

2.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Tambaram, Chengalpattu District.

¶41

Crl.R.C.No.2893 of 2025

¶42

05.01.2026

¶43

4/4

¶44

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

Srinath Arumugam v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinath Arumugam v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

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.Prabhu Vs The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police

Sathish Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police

Vignesh Vs The Superintendent of Police

Sundar Raj Vs the State Rep by Its

S. Malar Selvam Vs D. Sudhakar

K.Thangavel Vs State Rep.by