Lawful owners of seized property may reclaim items pending trial under certain conditions to prevent devaluation and ensure compliance with legal processes.

ORDER :

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

Heard Mr.K.Muthu Ganesa Pandian, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioners and Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent.

2. These Criminal Revision Cases have been filed to set aside the orders, dated 06.03.2025 made in Crl.M.P.Nos.174, 175, 176, 177 and 178 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Palani, and consequently, to direct the respondent to return the mobile phones and vehicle to the respective Petitioners.

3. Mr.K.Muthu Ganesa Pandian, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioners would submit that Petitioners, who were arraigned as Accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6 and 7, are owners of the mobile phones viz., VIVO V235G, Samsung GALAXY S 24 ULTRA, OPPO A53, VIVO X 200, Samsung Galaxy S20, CMALX2 (Honor), I-Phone and Samsung and 1^st Petitioner is the owner of vehicle viz.,Honda Amaze Grey color Car bearing Registration No.KL 55Ab 9669. The said vehicle and mobile phones were seized by Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.24 of 2025, dated 13.02.2025 for offence punishable under Section 25 (1B)(a) of Arms Act, alleging that the petitioners, along with two other accused, illegally possessed an SBBL 12-bore rifle with 6 bullets without any licence. Petitioners have filed Crl.M.P.Nos.174, 175, 176, 177 and 178 of 2025 before Judicial Magistrate, Palani, to grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was dismissed by the Court below by the impugned order dated 06.03.2025 for the reasons stated supra. Hence, these Criminal Revision Cases have been filed.

4. This Court, vide order dated 07.01.2026, directed Judicial Magistrate, Palani, to grant custody of mobile phones to the investigating agency, viz., Palani Adivaram Police Station, Dindigul District, and the same shall be handed over to Judicial Magistrate, Palani, after retrieving/extracting data from the said mobile phones and transmitting/migrating it to a device decided upon by Respondent. It is submitted that, in compliance with the order, the investigating agency handed over the mobile phones to the Judicial Magistrate, Palani.

5. Learned Counsel for Petitioners would further submit that Petitioners are the owner of the respective vehicle and mobile phones, and they would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In support thereof, a copy of Registration Certificate of said vehicle has been produced and the same was perused by Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent, who confirmed that Registration Certification stands in the name of Petitioner.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the said vehicle and mobile phones may be released subject to conditions that including in case, confiscation proceedings are being initiated, Petitioners must co-operate, same was agreed to by learned counsel for Revision Petitioners.

7. Before proceeding further, it may be relevant to refer to provisions of Sections 497 and 503 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), which reads as follows:-

"497. Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases.-When any property is produced before any Criminal Court during any inquiry or trial, the Court may make such order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such property pending the conclusion of the inquiry or trial, and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is otherwise expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to be sold or otherwise disposed of.

Explanation.- For the purposes of this section," property" includes-

(a) property of any kind or document which is produ