← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/52/2026closed

Suresh Krishnan v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

2026-01-08Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Suresh Krishnan ..Petitioner Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police Pallavaram Police Station, Crime No.550 of 2024.

..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to set aside the docket order dated 29.10.2025 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallavaram to number the petition and return the properties as prayed for, to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Original Petition.

For Petitioner :

Mr.N.S.Suganthan For Respondent :

Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to set aside the docket order dated 29.10.2025 passed by the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallavaram to number the petition and return the properties as prayed for, to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Original Petition. 2.

The brief facts of the case are as follows :- 2.1.

The petitioner is an accused facing trial in CNR No.TNKP01004603-2024 before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, for the offences punishable under Sections 75, 78(2), 79, and 351(2) of BNS 2023 and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act in Crime No.550 of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police. 2.2. During the course of investigation, the petitioner's mobile phone VIVO IQ 27 PRO 5G was seized by the respondent Police. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.2553 of 2024 with respect to Crime No.550 of 2024 before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, seeking bail. The learned Judge, vide order dated 09.09.2024, had granted bail to the petitioner. One of the conditions in the said order is that the petitioner had to surrender his original family card before the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram, for a period of six months. Thereafter, the complaint against the petitioner was withdrawn by the

de facto complainant as the matter was settled. Hence, action was dropped in Crime No.550 of 2024. At this juncture, the petitioner filed an application in unnumbered Crl.M.P.No... of 2025 in filing No.ATN20220011693C202500014 seeking return of mobile phone and original ration card before the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram. The learned Judge, vide docket order dated 29.10.2025, had returned the petition stating that IMEI number of the said mobile phone was not stated and the ration card was not recovered in the case. Aggrieved over the same, the present petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent police has returned the aforesaid mobile phone to the petitioner and further action has been dropped in this case. Further, he seeks liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the concerned Court seeking return of the ration card.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that after investigation in the matter, the FIR registered in Crime No. 550 of 2025 has been closed and further action has been dropped.

5. In view of the submission made on either side, this Criminal Original Petition stands closed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an

appropriate application before the concerned Court seeking return of the ration card. If any such petition is filed by the petitioner seeking return of ration card, the Trial Judge shall dispose of the same at the earliest. 08-01-2026 MRN To

1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallavaram

2. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu

3. The Inspector of Police, Pallavaram Police Station, Crime No.550 of 2024.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

MRN 08-01-2026