Ntl Logistics India Pvt Ltd v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI NTL Logistics India Pvt Ltd Chinnagoundapuram Post, Ramalingapuram, Behind AVS College, Attur Road, Salem-636106, Rep by its Authorized person, Asst. Manager Saravanan, 44years, Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police PEW, Salem City, Salem District.
Crime No.289/2025.
Respondent(s) PRAYER To call for the records relevant to the order in Crl.M.P.No.1763 of 2025 dated 25.10.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.6 Salem, and set aside the same and thereby allow the Criminal Revision Petition. 1/6
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.B.Sundarapandiyan For Respondent(s):
Dr.C.E.Pratap, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Salem, in Crl.M.P.No.1763 of 2023 in Crime No. 289 of 2025, thereby dismissing the petition filed for return of vehicle bearing Regn. No.KA-51 AA0173 Ashok Leyland container lorry.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, on the date of alleged occurrence, the vehicle was involved in illegal transportation of illicit arrack of more than 750 ml Super Grape Brandy-2 bottles. Hence, a case has been registered in Crime No.289 of 2025 for the offenes under Sections 4(1)(a), 4(1-A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. Pursuant to the registration of the FIR, the vehicle involved was seized and produced before the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Salem.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he is the authorised person of NTL Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. Company and the company is the owner of vehicle. He would submit that on the date of alleged occurrence, the vehicle was involved in transportation of Whirlpool washing machines worth about Rs.18 lakhs and during the transportation, the driver of vehicle had involved in illegal transportation of liquor bottles, which is no way 2/6
connected with the business of petitioner company, but the vehicle was seized by the respondent police. Without considering the same, the trial judge also dismissed the petition holding that the vehicle involved in the crime. Challenging the said findings, he preferred this Criminal Revision Case.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner is an accused in this case and the vehicle in question was involved in an offence under Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. Hence, he objected to return the vehicle.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. On perusal of records, it reveals the fact that the company is the owner of the vehicle. Admittedly, it was involved in transportation of Whirlpool washing machine, during transit, it was involved in transportation of alcohol. Further the provision under Section 451 of Cr.P.C.,/497(1) of BNSS provides for protection of the property from degradation due to non maintenance in the custody of the police as it takes long time for conclusion of criminal proceedings. The vehicle is in broad day light from the date of seizure and the trial has also been commenced and hence no useful purpose will be served in keeping the vehicles parked in the sunlight and rain. 3/6
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to order return of the vehicle to the petitioner and accordingly, the order dated 25.10.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1763 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Salem, is hereby set aside. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.6, Salem, is directed to return the vehicle bearing Regn. No.KA-51-AA0173 Ashok Leyland container lorry to the petitioner, forthwith on the following conditions:- (i) the petitioner is directed to execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate to the credit of Crime No.289 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. (ii) the petitioner shall deposit the original registration certificate of the vehicle with the concerned Magistrate. (iii) the seized item should be photographed at the cost of the petitioner herein and a list is to be prepared and the same is to be signed by the petitioner.
(iv) the petitioner shall not alienate and shall not make any alteration in the vehicle.
(v) the petitioner shall produce the vehicle before the Court and before the respondent police as and when required; (vi) If any of the conditions are violated, this order automatically stands cancelled.
4/6
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case stands allowed. 17-11-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To
1. Judicial Magistrate No.6, Salem.
2. The Inspector of Police PEW, Salem City, Salem District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
5/6
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rpp CRL RC No. 2375 of 17-11-2025 6/6