Sinuputheen v. The District Revenue Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY SINUPUTHEEN ... Petitioner Vs 1.
THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER, MAYILADUTHURAI DISTRICT.
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID, NAGAPATTINAM, IN CRIME NO.148 of 2022.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to release the petitioner's vehicle namely Ashok Leyland Lorry bearing Registration Number TN 52 E 6652 to the petitioner forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mrs.D.Selvakumari For R1 : Mr.R.Balamurugan Government Advocate For R2 : Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5
ORDER
The writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the first respondent to release the petitioner's vehicle being a lorry bearing Registration number TN 52 E 6652.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the lorry belonging to the petitioner was seized for involving in Criminal Case in Crime number 148 of 2022 for an alleged offence under Sections 6(4) of the Tamil Nadu Sugar Control (RDCS) Order 1982 read with Section 7 (1) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The vehicle was seized from the custody of the petitioner on 29.09.2022 and it lies with the respondents in the same state till date.
3.
When the matter came up for admission, the learned Government Advocate Criminal side appearing on behalf of the second respondent would submit that the vehicle is in the custody of the Revenue authorities. 4.
The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the first respondent would submit that now the respondents would initiate proceedings by issuing summons to the petitioner to appear before them on 2/5
11.04.2025.
5.
It can be seen that though the vehicle was seized in the year 2022, the same was neither produced by the concerned Court and property number is obtained nor any confiscation proceedings is initiated till date. Only now when the Government advocate had sought for instructions, it seems that the authorities are intending to take action.
6.
In view thereof, this Writ Petition stands disposed of on following terms:
(a) The respondent authorities shall return the vehicle to the petitioner within one week from the date of receipt of the web copy of the order without waiting for the certified copy of the order.
(b) Needless to mention that if any, photographs have to be taken for the purpose of the criminal case, including the engine number, Chasis number etc., and any videography has to be made of the vehicle, the same shall also be done and the copies of the registration certificate etc., shall be compared with the original and and it can be certified that the copies have been compared 3/5
with the original and the copies can be retained. (c) There shall be no order as to costs.
27.03.2025 veda To 1.
THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER, MAYILADUTHURAI DISTRICT.
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID, NAGAPATTINAM, IN CRIME NO.148 of 2022.
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
4/5
veda 27.03.2025 5/5