Babu v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Babu

...Petitioner

-VsState Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Manampathy Police Station, Chengalpattu.

Crime No.66 of 2023

...Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to the order dated 12.07.2024 made in Crl.M.P.No.950 of 2024 in Crime No.66 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police and set aside the same and direct the respondent herein to return the RC Book of the subject vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 19 D 8345 TATA MOTORS, Tipper Lorry, and pass such further orders. For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Senthilvel For Respondent :

Mr.C.E.Pratap, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/4

ORDER

The petition has been filed challenging the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.950 of 2024 in Crl.M.P.No.4019 of 2023 by which the earlier order directing the return of the petitioner's vehicle was recalled, since the petitioner had not surrendered the original RC book within the time prescribed as directed in the earlier order.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that subsequently the petitioner has surrendered the RC book; and that therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside. He would further submit that the RC is required now for obtaining fitness certificate and the same may be directed to be returned to him.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) confirms that impugned order cannot be faulted as the petitioner had violated the conditions and that the petitioner had subsequently surrendered the original RC book.

4. Admittedly, no steps were taken for seizure of the said vehicle even after the impugned order was passed. It also appears that the petitioner has 2/4

surrendered the RC book subsequently. The impugned order cannot be faulted, in view of the fact that the petitioner had not surrendered the RC book within the time stipulated; though it is the claim of the petitioner that he had filed a memo explaining the reasons for not surrendering the RC book earlier.

5. Considering the above facts, this Court finds that there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate. However, since the petitioner has already surrendered the passport, he is permitted to retain the custody of the vehicle.

6. If the petitioner claims that the RC book is required for the purpose of plying the vehicle and for obtaining the fitness certificate, he is at liberty to approach the learned Magistrate seeking return of the RC book, and the same may be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the same.

7. With the above observation, this criminal revision petition stands disposed of.

09.12.2025 cda 3/4

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

cda To 1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu. 2.The Inspector of Police, Manampathy Police Station, Chengalpattu.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

09.12.2025 4/4