Ramu.R v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Ramu ... Petitioner / owner of the vehicle vs.

State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Kelambakkam Police Station, Pallikaranai Police District, Chennai.

(Crime No.301 of 2023) ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.18 of 2024 dated 27.03.2024 on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruporur, Kancheepuram District and direct the respondent to release four wheeler TATA Indica Vista LX BS-IV car bearing Reg.No.TN-49, AM-6752, Engine No.100A20000281282, and Chassis No.MAT611425CPG48758 which was seized in connection with Crime NO.301 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police to the petitioner.

1/5

For Appellant : Mr.T.Balaji For R2 : Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.18 of 2024, dated 27.03.2024, on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruporur, Kancheepuram District and to direct the respondent to release the four wheeler TATA Indica Vista LX BS-IV, bearing Reg.No.TN-49-AM-6752, Engine No.100A20000281282, and Chassis No.MAT611425CPG48758 which was seized in connection with Crime No.301 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, but was falsely implicated in the case. He prayed for the return of vehicle, but the trial Court dismissed the petition. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed. It was further submitted that the trial Court failed to take note the fact that, the petitioner, a senior citizen, aged about 62 years, had only lent his vehicle to A1, who is alleged to have been involved in the offence under Section 2/5

302 IPC along with other accused persons.

3. It was contended that the petitioner is not an accused in the case. Without his knowledge, A1 had used the vehicle in the commission of the alleged offence. The vehicle has been kept in the police station open yard for more than two years, resulting in damage to it. Hence, he prays for the return of vehicle subject to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

4. Considering the fact that the petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused, and in view of the submission of the prosecution that the vehicle belongs to the petitioner, this Court finds merit in the request. Taking into account that the petitioner is a senior citizen aged about 62 years and has expressed willingness to comply with any conditions, this Court orders the return of the vehicle with the following conditions: i. . The petitioner shall not alienate or create any encumbrance over the vehicle.

ii. The petitioner shall produce the vehicle before the respondent police as and when required until completion of the trial. 3/5

Iii. The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- as security in connection with Crime No.18 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police.

5. In view of the above, this Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of.

02.09.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order rri To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruporur, Kancheepuram District 2.The Inspector of Police, Kelambakkam Police Station, Pallikaranai Police District, Chennai. (Crime No.301 of 2023) 3.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai. 4/5

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rri 02.09.2025 5/5