Rakesh Sharma v. The State Rep By, The Additional Superintendent Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.03.2025 Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Rakesh Sharma ... Petitioner Vs.
1. State Rep. by The Additional Superintendent of Police Prohibition Enforcement Wing (P.E.W.) Perambalur, Perambalur District
2. The Sub Inspector of Police Prohibition Enforcement Wing (P.E.W.) Perambalur (Crime No.181 of 2024) ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 rad with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Perambalur in Crl.M.P.No.477 of 2024 dated 07.08.2024 and release the revision petitioner's vehicle viz., Maruti Suzuki Ertica While Colour Car bearing Regn. No.TN 46 AB 7786.
1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Samivel For Respondents : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Perambalur in Crl.M.P.No.477 of 2024 dated 07.08.2024 and release the revision petitioner's vehicle viz., Maruti Suzuki Ertica, while Colour Car bearing Regn. No.TN 46 AB 7786.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the car bearing Regn. No.TN 46 AB 7786. The said car was seized by the respondent police in connection with Crime No.181 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 4(1)(a) read with 4(1-A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. Therefore, the petitioner filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.477 of 2024 before the Judicial 2/6
Magistrate No.I, Perambalur seeking return of property and the same was dismissed by order dated 07.08.2024 on the ground that the competent authority has already initiated confiscation proceedings and notice was also served to the petitioner.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that the investigation has already completed and the charged sheet has also been filed and that the competent authority has already initiated confiscation proceedings.
4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
5. It is seen that the confiscation proceedings has already been initiated by the competent authority and notice has also been served to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Magistrate.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. 3/6
7. The petitioner is at liberty to participate in the confiscation proceedings.
13.03.2025 (2/2) Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ksa-2 4/6
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Perambalur
2. The Additional Superintendent of Police Prohibition Enforcement Wing (P.E.W.) Perambalur, Perambalur District
3. The Sub Inspector of Police Prohibition Enforcement Wing (P.E.W.) Perambalur
4. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras 5/6
P.VELMURUGAN. J.
Ksa-2 13.03.2025 (2/2) 6/6