Kannan v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :17.12.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.KRISHNAVALLI Kannan

...Petitioner

Vs.

The State Rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police, Poovanthi Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(In Crime No.88 of 2019) ... Respondent Prayer : This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.2514 of 2019 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, dated 04.10.2019 and order interim custody of the TATA 407 Mini Van bearing Registration No.TN-74-AQ-8975 seized by the respondent on 18.08.2019 in connection with Crime No,88 of 2019 to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Ms.D.Deepamathi For Respondent : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate (Crl.side) ***

O R D E R

The petitioner claims to be the owner of the TATA 407 Mini Van, bearing Registration No.TN-74-AQ-8975. According to the petitioner, the alleged vehicle was seized by the respondent on 18.08.2019 in connection with a case in Crime No.88 of 2019 for the offence under Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. Seeking return of the said vehicle, the petitioner filed a petition before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, for interim custody. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, by order dated 04.10.2019 has dismissed the same. Challenging the said order, the petitioner is before this Court with this petition.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that as per the General Clauses Act, the Special Court can exercise all the powers of Magistrate, so the Special Court can entertain the petition under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. But, the special Court without analyzing the G.O on which it was constituted, has rejected the 1/3

application. It is well settled that during the pendency of confiscation proceedings, the vehicle needs to be returned to the person, who is entitled to have. This return will have no impact on the confiscation proceeding, as the confiscation proceeding is an independent proceeding.

4.In view of the above, this Criminal Revision is allowed and the order of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, in Cr.M.P.No.2514 of 2019, dated 04.10.2019, is set aside and the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, is directed to return the vehicle to the petitioner subject to the confiscation proceedings on the following conditions:- (a)The petitioner shall deposit the original Registration Certificate of the vehicle;

(b)The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) to the credit of Crime No. 88 of 2019 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

(c)The petitioner shall not make any alteration of the vehicle;

(d)The petitioner shall produce the same before the Court as an when required until final order is passed in the confiscation proceedings.

5.The Authority under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act may proceed with the confiscation proceedings and the petitioner shall obey any order that may be passed in the said proceeding by the authority.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (co) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) vsd To 1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai.

2/3

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Poovanthi Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1 CC to Mr.T.LENIN KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-105341[F] dated 17/12/2019 ) 17.12.2019 VB(20.12.2019) 3P 5C 3/3