Parthasarathy, Aged 66 Years, v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28.08.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.OP No.20021 of 2018 *Parthasarathy .. Petitioner Vs The State, represented by The Inspector of Police, Kanathur Police Station, *Chennai District.

(Crime No.437 of 2018) .. Respondent Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order in C.M.P.No.4242/2018 dated 03.08.2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Alanthur, Chennai and to return the vehicle registered bearing No.TN05-BR 3330 in Crime No.437 of 2018 pending investigation on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kanathur Police Station. For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Noorudeen For Respondent : Mr.C.Raghavan Government Advocate

ORDER

This petition has been filed to set aside the order in C.M.P.No.4242/2018 dated 03.08.2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Alanthur, Chennai and to return the vehicle registered bearing No.TN05-BR 3330 in Crime No.437 of 2018 pending investigation on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kanathur Police Station.

2. The respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.437/2018 on 24.06.2018 under Sections 148, 353, 307 and 506 (ii) IPC and Section 25 (1B) (a) of the Arms Act against one C.D.Mani and his group.

3. It is the case of the police that the said C.D.Mani travelling in Mahindra XUV 500 car bearing registration No.TN05 BR 3330 opened fire at the police. In the course of the investigation in the said case, the said car used by the accused has been seized and produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Alandur. Parthasarathy, the father of C.D.Mani, filed a

C.M.P.No.4242 of 2018 under Section 451 of Cr.P.C., for interim custody of the said property, which has been dismissed by order dated 03.08.2018, challenging which, the father of C.D.Mani, viz., Parthasarathy is before this Court.

4. Heard Mr.S.Noorudeen, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Raghavan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner/Parthasarathy placed strong reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat [(2002) 10 SCC 290] and submitted that the trial Court ought to have followed the said judgment and returned the car to the petitioner.

6. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) refuted the contentions.

7.This Court gave its anxious consideration to the rival submissions.

8. On a reading of the impugned order, it is seen that the trial Court has dismissed Parthasarathy's petition on the ground that the R.C.Book is not in his name, but in the name of C.D.Mani.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that C.D.Mani is under detention and therefore, on behalf of him, his father has filed the petition under Section 451 Cr.P.C.

10. In the opinion of this Court, the order passed by the trial Court does not suffer from any infirmity, inasmuch as, the R.C.Book of the car in question is in the name of C.D.Mani and therefore, the trial Court was justified in refusing to hand over the interim custody of the car to Parthasarathy. In the result, this petition is dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) Amended as per order of this court dated 12/09/2018 Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Court, To be Substituted to Alanthur, Chennai.

The order alread despatched on 03/09/2018 2.The Inspector of Police, Kanathur Police Station, Salem District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

+2cc to Mr.S.Noorudeen, Advocate, S.R.No.59589 +2cc to M/s.Noorudeen, Advocate, S.R.No.63334 Crl.OP.No.20021 of 2018 GSP(31/08/2018) nr 12/09/2018