← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1073/2021allowed

Kasiyammal v. The District Revenue Officer

2021-01-25Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.01.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Kasiyammal ... Petitioner -Vs1.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy, Trichy District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Civil Supplies C.I.D., Trichy District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to release the TATA Ace bearing Reg.No.TN-31-AT-0250 seized by the second respondent on 19.12.2020 to the petitioner. For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For Respondents :

Mrs.S.Srimathy Special Government Pleader

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel on either side. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2.The petitioner claims to be the owner of the petition mentioned vehicle. It was seized in connection with the petition mentioned crime number. The petitioner's counsel states that till date the vehicle in question has not been produced before the jurisdictional court.

3.It has been held time and again that keeping the vehicle in the custody of the respondents is not going to serve any purpose. On the other hand, it will contribute to loss of value. Even though the criminal case has been registered, the vehicle in question is yet to be produced before the jurisdictional Court. The case is still under investigation. Therefore, the Writ Court will always have the power to direct release of vehicle.

4.The petitioner's counsel on instructions gives an undertaking that the petitioner will not alienate the petition mentioned vehicle till the confiscation proceedings are over. He also gives a further undertaking that the petitioner will also produce the vehicle as and 1/3

when the respondents call for the vehicle for enquiry and cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents. He further states that the vehicle has not been involved in any previous case of the same nature. He also submitted that the petitioner is also not having any previous case. The petitioner undertakes to remit a sum of Rs.10,000/- as non refundable cost without prejudice to the confiscation proceedings.

5.I make it clear that it is very much open to the respondents herein to initiate and conclude the confiscation proceedings. The only relief that I am granting is interim custody of the vehicle. I have not gone into the merits of the matter.

6.Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions, I direct release of the petition mentioned vehicle subject to the following conditions : a) The petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) in favour of the Sessions Judge, Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Srivilliputhur in Bank Account Number:39205056894, IFSC Code: SBIN0000921, State Bank of India, Srivilliputhur. It will be a non refundable payment. After depositing the said amount, the learned counsel for the petitioner herein shall intimate in writing to the said Court with the relevant deposit receipt. b) This amount shall be utilized by the Special Court for POCSO Act cases to pay interim compensation to the victim concerned in Crime No.663 of 2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Woman Police Station, Rajapalayam in the manner stated in the order of this Court dated 19.01.2021 in W.P.(MD)No.659 of 2021. c) The petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in question till the proceedings are completed.

d) The petitioner shall produce all the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicle. If the petitioner concerned is an agreement holder and the R.C book is with the financier, he or she can be permitted to produce the photocopies of the relevant documents and if the vehicle is a new one, sales invoice can be produced.

e) As and when the respondents call for the vehicle for enquiry, the petitioner has to produce the vehicle in question and shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

7.After completion of the aforesaid formalities, the respondents shall release the petition mentioned vehicle forthwith without any delay. The confiscation proceedings can go on. If the undertaking given by the petitioner is breached, the petitioner will 2/3

not be entitled to interim release of the vehicle in future and the order passed by this Court will stand recalled and the vehicle in question will be taken back to custody and it will be released only after getting orders from this Court on such terms as this Court may deem it fit to impose.

8.The Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI Act) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) rmi Note :In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy, Trichy District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Civil Supplies C.I.D., Trichy District.

Copy To:

1.The Inspector of Police, AWPS, Rajapalayam, Virudhunar District.

2.The Sessions Judge, Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Srivilliputhur.

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-2138[F] dated 27/01/2021 ) 25.01.2021 (MJ)CO AP(03/02/2021) 3 P 6C 3/3