1. The revision petitioner has come forward with this revision challenging the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Nagapattinam dated 8.2.2011 in Crl. MP. No. 472 of 2011 in Crime No. 314 of 2010, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner seeking for the relief of the return of the vehicle, viz., Tata Sumo Car bearing Registration No. TN-51-P-2826.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the Tata Sumo Car and she is not an accused in the case and only the husband of the revision petitioner is an accused who has been implicated for the offencs under Section 4(1)(aaa) read with 4(1-A) of TNP Act and under Section 5 and 6 of the Tamil Nadu Rectified Spirit Rules. The learned counsel would submit that the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition mainly on the ground of initiation of the confiscation proceedings. It is contended that this Court held in number of matters that pending confiscation proceedings is not a bar for the return of vehicle.

3. Mr. V.R. Balasubramaniam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the vehicle involved in this matter was seized for the