Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Magesh vs State Rep.By on 6 January, 2025

                                                                              Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                     DATED : 06.01.2025

                                                           CORAM

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI

                                                  Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025

                     Magesh                                                  ... Petitioner
                                                              Vs.

                     State rep.by
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Eraniel Police Station,
                     Kanyakumari District.
                     (Crime No.36 of 2024)                                   ... Respondent

                     PRAYER : Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of
                     BNSS, to call for the records to set aside the condition No.5 of the order
                     passed in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial
                     Magistrate, Eraniel dated 26.04.2024.

                                         For Petitioner       : Mr.C.M.Mari Chelliah Prabhu

                                         For Respondent      : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
                                                               Additional Public Prosecutor

                                                           ORDER

The present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the condition No.5 of the order, dated 26.04.2024, in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025

2. The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle Hydraulic Excavator bearing Serial No.LGI915EZENN900991, Engine No.22C84972093 and Chassis No.CLG915E12021066, and has filed a petition under Section 451 read with Section 457 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2024 seeking interim custody of the vehicle. The learned Judicial Magistrate, after hearing both the sides, allowed the petition and granted interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner on the following conditions :

“1/ kDjhuu; thfdj;jpd; jw;nghija kjpgg; pw;F cupa Mtzj;ij rku;gpj;J me;j kjpg;gpw;Fupa ,U egu; IhkPd;jhu; jFe;j Mtz';fSld;-rhd;WfSld; (Solvency) ,e;ePjpkd;wk; Vw;W bfhs;Sk; tifapy; Kd;dpWj;j ntz;Lk;/ 2/ kDjhuu; nkw;go jlag;bghUshd thfdj;ij tpw;fnth. cUkhw;wk; bra;anth. ntW ve;j tifapnyh mjd; jd;ikapid. njhw;wj;jpid khw;wk; bra;af;TlhJ/ 3/ kDjhuu; nkw;go thfdj;ij ,t;tHf;if nghd;w ve;jbthU Fw;w bray;fspYk; <LgLj;j TlhJ/ mt;thW <LgLj;j khl;nld; vd;W gpukhzgj;jpuk; K:ykhf jhf;fy; bra;a ntz;Lk;/ 4/ kDjhuu; nkw;go thfdj;ij ,e;ePjpkd;wnkh my;yJ tprhuiz ePjpkd;wnkh nfl;Fk; nghJ cldoahf ve;etpj fhuzKk; brhy;yhky; xg;gilg;ngd; vd;Wk; nkw;go thfdj;ij muRf;F Mjhag;gLj;Jk; eltof;iff;fhf nfl;Fk; nghJ cld; ve;jtpj fhuzKk; brhy;yhky; ,e;ePjpkd;wj;jpnyh 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025 my;yJ tprhuiz ePjpkd;wj;jpnyh my;yJ ePjpkd;wk; cj;jutpLk; mjpfhu tuk;gplnkh xg;gilg;ngd; vd;W gpukhz gj;jpuk; jhf;fy; bra;a ntz;Lk;/ 5/ kDjhuu; gpujp khjk; 1tJ ntiy ehspy; nkw;go thfdj;ij ,e;ePjpkd;wj;jpd; Kd; Kd;dpiygLj;j ntz;Lk;/”
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is regularly complying with the aforesaid condition No.5 imposed by the trial Court till date. Since the vehicle is a Earthmover i.e. Hydraulic Excavator, it is very difficult to produce the vehicle before the Court on every month. Hence, he prays to set aside the condition No.5 of the order dated 26.04.2024, in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent has not raised any serious objection to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the submissions made by both the sides, this Court is inclined to modify the condition No.5 of the order passed by the learned 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025 Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel in Crl.M.P.No.818 of 2024 dated 26.04.2024.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed, and the condition No.5 imposed by the trial Court is hereby set aside, and the petitioner is directed to produce the vehicle before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel as and when specifically ordered by the learned Magistrate.
7. All other conditions imposed by the trial Court shall remain unaltered.




                                                                                       06.01.2025
                     NCC      : Yes / No
                     Index    : Yes / No
                     Internet : Yes / No
                     mkn




                     4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025 To
1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.
2.The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025 P.VADAMALAI, J.

mkn Crl.R.C.(MD)No.4 of 2025 06.01.2025 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis