Kannan @ Nagappan v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Kannan @ Nagappan S/o.Subbaiyan, No.46, Krishnamoorthy Nagar, Meethikudi Salai, Chidambaram. Now residing No.110, 3rd main road, Bhuvaneshwari Nagar, Bangalore.

Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, CBCID Cuddalore P.S., Cr.No.01/2024 Respondent(s) PRAYER To call for the records relating to the order dated 30.12.2024 made in Cr,.M.P.No.16204 of 2024 in Crime No.12024 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore and set aside the same.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. V. Balu For Respondent(s):

Dr.C.E.Pratap, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/5

ORDER

Challenging the impugned order dated 30.12.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore in Crl.M.P.No.16204 of 2024, thereby dismissing the petition filed for return of following articles :- (a) Samsung Galaxy M13 (Stardust Brown, 4GB, 64 GB Storage), 6000 Mah Battery upto 8GE RAM with RAM Plus /bob4F2K7N1 (STPL M 13 4/64 BROWN) and (b) Samsung Galaxy M34 5G (Prism Silver, 8GB, 128GB) 120Hz sAMOLED Display / 50 MP Triple no shake Cam/6000mAh Battery/4GenOS upgrade and 5 year security update/16GB RAM with RAM+/Android 13/Without charger/B0C7C1JGQL(STPL M34 5G 8/128 Silver) 3.

Pursuant to the registration of FIR in Crime No.1 of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police, the respondent police seized two laptops, two Samsung mobile phones, one TVS Gold Dot matrix printer etc. from the accused alleging that they have created fake certificates. The case has been registered for the offence punishable under Sections 465, 468, 472, 471, 511 of I.P.C. as against the petitioner and others. The petitioner is the owner of the aforementioned properties and he is arrayed as A3 in this case. 2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) would submit that totally, 15 accused involved in this case and mobile phone was already returned. He would submit that based on the allegation, the petition was dismissed by the trial court.

5. Heard and considered rival submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and perused the materials placed before this court.

6. On seeing the conduct of party, from whom, nearly about 400 fake certificates were seized by the respondent police and for that purpose, the laptop was used according to the prosecution. Therefore, the handing over of laptop to the petitioner would lead to miscarriage of justice and the trial court rightly dismissed the petition for return of articles, which needs no interference of this court. Hence, this findings held by the trial court is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. 24-10-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp 3/5

To

1. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore.

2. Inspector of Police, CBCID Cuddalore Police Station.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 4/5

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

rpp CRL RC No. 2077 of 24-10-2025 5/5