High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 MAD CK 1539

Rajarathinam vs The State Of Tamil Nadu

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench · Decided on 9 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
R. Vijayakumar, J
CASE NUMBER
Crl. OP(MD).No.19469 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

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

Loading membership options…

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

10 paragraphs · 405 words

The present petition has been filed challenging the return order passed by II Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai on 30.07.2026 wherein the application filed by the petitioner under Section 497 of BNSS has been returned.

2.

The petitioner herein is arrayed as accused No.3 in C.C.No.214 of 2024 on the file of the II Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai wherein he is charged with the offence under Sections 294(b), 353, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B), 29(1), 25 and 27(a) of NDPS Act.

3.

Pending trial, the petitioner herein had filed an application under Section 497 of BNSS seeking interim custody/return of certain properties connected with the case. The said application has been returned by an order of the concerned Court dated 30.07.2026.

4.

A perusal of the said order reveals that the application has been returned on the sole ground that the correct particulars as per Form 91 and RPR Register have not been mentioned. After complying with the correction, the petitioner represented the same on 28.08.2026. However, for the second time, it was returned on 30.07.2026 which was under challenge in the present petition.

5.

According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the following items in Column No.10 of the charge sheet namely Sl.Nos.35, 44, 94, 95, 96 and 97 for which the interim custody is being sought for. The said column clearly reflects RPR Numbers and dates. According to him, he had had already provided Form-91 details also.

6.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material records.

7.

This Court has perused the charge sheet and serial numbers in column No.10 of the charge sheet which are referred to by the petitioner wherein RPR numbers and their dates are reflected.

8.

In view of the above said facts, the petitioner is directed to enclose a separate form reflecting Form-91 particulars and RPR Numbers and dates for the material for which interim custody is sought for and represent the said application. On such representation, if it is otherwise in order, the trial Court is directed to number the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

9.

With the above said observations, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

Note: Registry is directed to return the original impugned order after obtaining acknowledgement of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.