Madras High Court
B.Vignesh vs State Rep. By on 20 April, 2021
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.OP.No.7341 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.OP.No.7341 of 2021
B.Vignesh ... Petitioner
Versus
State rep. by
Sub-Inspector of Police,
PEW, Triplicane range,
Chennai. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent to return the petitioner's
vehicle (Yamaha FZS) in Reg.No.TN-01, BH-5108 in Crime No.16 of
2021 on the file of the respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Saravanan
For Respondent : Mr.C.Raghavan
Government Advocate
Page No.1 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.OP.No.7341 of 2021
ORDER
The petitioner who is the owner of Yamaha FZS bearing Reg.No.TN-01, BH-5108 had filed a return of property petition before the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. The above Yamaha FZS was involved in transportation of brandi bottles for which a case under Section 4(1)(a) of TNP Act against 1.Muthusamy and
2.Kathiravan came to be registered on 14.01.2021 in Crime No.16 of 2021. The accused were arrested along with the vehicle Yamaha FZS, that carried brandi bottles, for which Seizure Mahazar Ex.P2 has been marked. In this case, the trial court by Judgment dated 12.02.2021 in CC.No.562 of 2021 had acquitted the accused.
2. Thereafter, the petitioner being the owner of the vehicle had filed return of property petition under Sections 457 and 452 of Cr.P.C. The trial court had returned the return of property petition for the reason that the Yamaha FZS bearing Reg.No.TN-01, BH-5108 has not been produced before the Court. The trial court ought not have returned the petition since the petitioner has filed the petition under Sections 457 and Page No.2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.OP.No.7341 of 2021 452 of Cr.P.C. only after concluding the trial in CC.No.562 of 2021. Section 457 of Cr.P.C. states about the procedure upon seizure of property by police. In this case, PW3 had admitted about the seizure of the vehicle through Ex.P2. The relevant portion of the evidence of PW3 is extracted hereunder.
"ehd; ,d;iwa njjptiuapy; vjphpaplkpUe;J ifg;gw;wg;gl;l thfdj;ij muRilahf;Ftjw;F ve;j eltof;fia[k; vLf;ftpy;iy vd;why; rhpay;y. tz;oapd; chpikahsUf;F ve;jtpj mwptpg;gk[ ; bfhLf;ftpy;iy"
In view of the same, the trial court ought to have entertained the petition for return of property. Hence, the trial court order dated 19.03.2021 is set aside and the trial court is directed to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner and thereafter, dispose of the same on merits. Page No.3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.OP.No.7341 of 2021 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
mbi
3. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed.
20.04.2021 mbi Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes Speaking/Non-Speaking Order To
1.Sub-Inspector of Police, PEW, Triplicane range, Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
Crl.OP.No.7341 of 2021 Page No.4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/