Madras High Court
Arokkiyathas vs The State By on 19 April, 2023
Author: V. Sivagnanam
Bench: V. Sivagnanam
CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. SIVAGNANAM
CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023
Arokkiyathas .. Petitioner
Vs
The State by
The SHO,
Sathiyamangalam Police Station,
Villupuram District.
Crime No.104 of 2022 ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under section 397 r/w.401 Cr.P.C. to set
aside the order ;passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gingee in
Crl.M.P.No.4369 of 2022, dated 14.08.2022 and direct the respondent Police
ot return the vehicle TN-16-X-2743 John Deere-Tractor & Tipper to the
petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Soban
For Respondent : Mr. R. Vinothraja, GA (crl.side)
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023
ORDER
This Criminal Revision case has been filed challenging the order of dismissal dated 14.08.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Gingee in Crl.M.P.No.4369 of 2022 seeking interim custody of the vehicle viz., Tractor and Tipper, TN-16-X-2743 John Deere-Tractor & Tipper.
2.The fact of the case is that the petitioner is the owner of the Tractor and Tipper bearing Registration No.TN-16-X-2743 John Deere. The respondent police registered a case in Cr.No.104 of 2022 on 14.08.2022 for the offence under Sections 379 of I.P.C. and 21 (1) and 4A(1) of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulations) Act against the driver of the vehicle for illegal transportation of 1 unit of gravel river sand without any valid permit. Pursuant to which, they have seized the above said vehicle alleging that the vehicle has been engaged in illegal transportation of sand. The petitioner who is the owner of the vehicle is not an accused in the said case. Now the vehicle was kept under the custody of the court below in C.P.No.708 of 2022. Since the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, he filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.4369 of 2022 before the Judicial Magistrate, Gingee for return of 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 property in C.P.No.708 of 2022. The trial court dismissed the petition on the ground that the said vehicle is involved in sand theft without proper and valid license.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the vehicle is not involved in any previous case of offence of similar in nature. The vehicle has been kept under the custody of the court from 14.08.2022 in C.P.No.708 of 2022 and if the vehicle is kept in open space under unconditional weather conditions, the same would depreciate its value and user capacity.
4. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no purpose will be served in keeping the vehicle under the custody of respondent police and if the vehicle is kept for a long time in the open space, it would cause damage to the vehicle. The petitioner is ready to give appropriate guarantee as well as security for return of vehicle and also he will produce the vehicle, as and when required either before the respondent police or before the trial court. Hence, he prayed to return the vehicle and he is ready to obey any 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 condition imposed on him by this Court.
5. The learned Govt. Advocate (Crlside) objected to return of vehicle, stating that the vehicle was used for illegal transportation of gravel sand and if the vehicle is ordered to be returned, he may use the vehicle for committing same offence. He fairly conceded that the vehicle is not involved in any previous case of similar in nature.
6. Heard both sides and perused the entire materials available on record.
7.A perusal of the records would reveal that the respondent police, while conducting police patrolling in Sathyamangalam to Gingee road, on receiving secret information regarding sand theft, went to Sathyamangalam Bus stop, where, they found the accused persons were illegally transporting the gravel sand without any permit and on seeing the police, the driver of the vehicle escaped from the spot. Pursuant to which, they have seized vehicle involved in sand theft and registered a case against the owners of the vehicle in Cr.No.104 of 2022 for the offence 379 of I.P.C. and 21 (1) and 4A(1) of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulations) Act. The petitioner is the owner of the tractor and Tipper bearing Registration No.TN-16-X-2743 John 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 Deere. After seizure, it was produced before the court below in C.P.No.708 of 2022 and it has been kept under custody from 14.08.2022 onwards.
8. Perusal of records would further reveal that the petitioner is the owner of vehicle and he is ready to give guarantee and security for returning the vehicle. If the vehicle is being kept in an open space, it would cause damage to the vehicle and the value of the vehicle is diminished and continuing to keep the vehicle in open air would make the vehicle unusable. Further, the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai and others Vs.State of Gujarat in Special Leave Petition (crl.) 2745 of 2022 dated 01.10.2002 has held that in order to protect the property, the Apex Court has directed to handover the seized articles to the owner on proper Panchnama.
9. Considering the above aspects and also the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court is of the view that keeping the vehicle idle in the open space, will diminish its nature and lose its value and no purpose will be served. As such, considering the nature of offence and also taking into 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 account the fact that the vehicle is not involved in any other case similar in nature previously, this Court is inclined to allow the Criminal Revision Case.
10. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the impugned order passed by the Trial Court is set aside. The interim custody of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-16-X-2743 John Deere Tractor and Tipper is ordered to be handed over to the petitioner, who is the owner of the vehicle on the following conditions.
i. the petitioner shall prove his ownership of the vehicle by producing R.C.Book and other relevant records; ii. the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees four lakhs only) before the Judicial Magistrate, Gingee.
iii.The Court may prepare a panchnama in Judicial Form No.82 with regard to the vehicle and such panchanama can be used in evidence.
iv. the petitioner may take photograph of the vehicle and certified under Section 65B of the Central Act 1 of 1972 and such photographs may be used as secondary evidence. v. the petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in any manner;
6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 vi.the petitioner shall give an undertaking that he will not use the vehicle for any illegal activities in future; vii.the petitioner shall also produce the vehicle as and when required before the court below and before the respondent police.
19.04.2023 vum Index: yes/no Speaking order / Non speaking order To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Gingee.
2. The SHO, Sathiyamangalam Police Station, Villupuram District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
V. SIVAGNANAM, J.
vum 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 CRL.R.C.No.409 of 2023 19.04.2023 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis