High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 04 MAD CK 0371

K. Kannan vs State

Madras High Court · Decided on 9 April 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Sathyanarayanan, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal R.C. (MD) No. 274 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

22 paragraphs · 675 words

M. Sathyanarayanan, J.—The revision Petitioner claims to be the owner of the Car bearing Registration No. TN-74-A-6373. The Petitioner was one of the accused for the alleged commission of the offences under Sections 3(2)(a), 4(2)(c) and 7(1)(a) of Prevention of Immoral Traffice Act in Cr. No. 23 of 2011 registered by the Sattur Taluk Police Station.

2.

The learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner would submit that he is nothing to do with the alleged commission of the offence and that the Car after seizure is kept in open place right from 12.01.2011 and consequently, it is open to vagaries of weather and hence, the value and utility of the vehicle is going down day by day.

3.

It is further submitted by the learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner that in the event of the impugned order being set aside and the vehicle is handed over to him, he will abide the conditions imposed in this regard.

4.

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the vehicle under question has been used for the commission of the offence punishable under the Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act and therefore, the lower Court was right in rejecting the application filed u/s 451 Code of Criminal Procedure for interim custody.

5.

This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and also perused the typed set of documents.

6.

The Honourable Supreme Court in catena of decisions held that the seized vehicles are being kept in open places and hence, the vehicles are losing their value and utility and subject to the conditions, the vehicles can be ordered to be returned to the original owners by way of interim measure.

7.

This Court, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, is passing the following order:

(i) The order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Kovilpatti, in Crl.M.P. No. 1201 of 2011 in C.C. No. 16 of 2011 dated 25.02.2011, is set aside;

(ii) The vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-74-A-6373 [Chassis No. III-685914 and Engine No. D-345257] is ordered to be returned to the revision Petitioner by way of interim custody subject to the following conditions:

(a) The Petitioner shall produce necessary documents with regard to his ownership to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Kovilpatti;

(b) The Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the said Court;

(c) On compliance of the conditions (a) and (b), the said vehicle shall be handed over to the revision Petitioner by way of interim custody;

(d) The Petitioner after getting the custody of the said vehicle, shall not alienate or encumber the same and also keep the vehicle in a road worthy condition;

(e) The Petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when required by the Respondent for producing the same before the jurisdictional Court for inspection.

(f) Failure on the part of the revision Petitioner to comply with any one of the aforesaid conditions would result in dismissal of this petition automatically without any further reference to this Court.

8.

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

9.

At the instance of the learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner, this matter is taken up for hearing under the caption for "Being Mentioned".

10.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the correct address of the Respondent is "State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sattur Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District" and it has been wrongly typed as Tuticorin District. Therefore, prays for appropriate correction in the cause title.

11.

This Court heard the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) also.

12.

Therefore, this Court taking into consideration the rival submission is amending the cause title as follows:

State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sattur Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

13.

The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment and to reissue the copy of the order to the counsel for the Petitioner subject to payment of necessary charges.