Dismissed¶¶29

Sivaguru v. the State Rep by

Madras HC17 Jun 2026WP/17532/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; show cause notice; confiscation of vehicle; final confiscation order passed during pendency; appeal not availed; liberty to challenge confiscation order before first respondent within two weeks; Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act 2024 Sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A), 14(A); Crime No.136/2025; Prohibition Enforcement Wing Cuddalore/Panruti; vehicle TN 32-AS-2187 Hero Splendor Plus; Article 226 certiorarified mandamus; no costs; Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan; decided 17-06-2026; connected WMP Nos. 19883 & 19885 of 2025 also dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Since the final order of confiscation was passed by the first respondent after issuance of the show cause notice, the prayer sought for in the writ petition challenging the show cause notice has become infructuous. ¶¶27

Sivaguru Vs the State Rep by — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who states she is the owner of the vehicle used by an accused in Crime No.136 of 2025 and is not herself an accused, is entitled to release of the vehicle seized in the proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024. +1 more

¶¶22

Ratio / Principle

¶¶27

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order of confiscation in respect of her vehicle in the manner known to law before the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J.; decision dated 17-06-2026) dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking certiorarified mandamus to quash a show cause notice dated 16.04.2025 issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Cuddalore (proceedings No. Na.Ka.En:01/ Ka.Thu. Ka / Ma.V.Aa. Pirivu / Cuddalore/ 2025) and to direct release of the petitioner's Hero Splendor Plus two-wheeler (TN 32-AS-2187), allegedly used by an accused in Crime No.136 of 2025 registered under Sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A) and 14(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024. The petitioner had replied to the notice claiming ownership and denying that she was an accused. On the counter filed by the second respondent it emerged that after the show cause notice the first respondent passed the confiscation order and served it on the petitioner, who had not preferred any appeal. Holding the prayer infructuous, the Court dismissed the writ petition and the connected WMP Nos. 19883 & 19885 of 2025 without costs, granting the petitioner liberty to challenge the confiscation order before the first respondent within two weeks of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶1

WP No. 17532 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

WP No. 17532 of 2025 AND WMP Nos. 19883 & 19885 of 2025

¶7

Sivaguru

¶8

W/o.Ayyanar, No.6, Mattaiyan Street, Gandhikuppam, Thiruvennainallur Post, Villupuram District.

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

The State Rep By The Deputy Superintendent Of Police Prohibition Of Enforcement Wing, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

¶12

The Inspector Of Police Prohibition Of Enforcement Wing, Panruti, Cuddalore District. (Crime No.136/2025)

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records sequel to the impugned order issued by the 1^st respondent vide proceedings No. Na.Ka.En:01/ Ka.Thu. Ka / Ma.V.Aa. Pirivu / Cuddalore/ 2025 dated 16.04.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents to release the petitioner’s vehicle (i.e. , bearing TN 32- AS- 2187 Hero Splendor Plus Two- Wheeler Black Colour) and pass such other further order or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

¶15

Page1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 17532 of 2025

¶18

For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Kalaiyarasan For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition has been filed challenging the show cause notice issued

¶21

to the first respondent dated 16.04.2025 calling upon the petitioner to submit

¶22

reply for the show cause notice. On receipt of the same, the petitioner also replied stating that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and she is not an accused. However, her vehicle was used by an accused in crime No 136 of 2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 4 (1)(C), 4(1)(A), 14(A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024. However, no order has been passed so far.

¶23

2. On perusal of the counter filed by the second respondent and also the submissions, it reveals after receipt of show cause notice, the first respondent passed confiscation order and the same was also duly served to the petitioner. However, the petitioner did not file an appeal so far. Instead of filing any appeal, the petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the show cause notice. Now after issuance of show cause notice ,the final order of confiscation has been passed by the first respondent.

¶24

__________ Page2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

WP No. 17532 of 2025

¶27

3. In view of the above, the prayer sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order of confiscation in respect of her vehicle in the manner known to law before the

¶28

first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

4. In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently,

¶30

the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed.

¶31

17-06-2026

¶32

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶33

MTL