The court confirmed the principle that seized property should be returned if no ongoing legal necessity remains, establishing conditions for its interim custody.

ORDER

The Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order, dated

09.01.2024, passed in Cr.M.P.No.5290 of 2023 on the file of the Special District Court to Deal with the Cases of Offences in Contravention of the Provisions of the Mines & Minerals (D&R) Act, Madurai dismissing the petition filed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the vehicle viz. Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-76-W-1936. On 15.01.2022, the respondent police seized the vehicle on the ground that the vehicle was used for transporting sand without any valid license or permit, and registered a case in Crime No.25 of 2022 for the offence under Section 379 of IPC r/w Sections 21 (1) and 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development &

Regulation) Act.

3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has approached the Special District Court to Deal with the Cases of Offences in Contravention of the Provisions of the Mines & Minerals (D&R) Act, Madurai by filing a petition for the return of vehicle bearing registration No.TN-76-W-1936 in Crl.M.P.No.5290 of 2023, and the learned Judge, Special District Court to Deal with the Cases of Offences in Contravention of the Provisions of the Mines & Minerals (D&R) Act, Madurai, vide order dated 09.01.2024, has dismissed the said petition. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the petitioner has now come forward with the present revision.

4. The name of the 2^nd respondent has been printed in the cause list. Despite the name has been printed in the cause list, the 2^nd respondent has neither entered appearance through a counsel nor in-

person.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the 1^st respondent.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the vehicle viz. Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-76-W-1936 was purchased by the petitioner from one K.Vayakattusamy, S/o.Kathiresan, who is the 2^nd respondent herein and is presently owned by the petitioner. The said K.Vayakattusamy has executed transfer of ownership in favour of the petitioner under Form 29 and Form 30 and the same have also been enclosed, and the said vehicle has no connection whatever with the alleged occurrence, and the vehicle is with the police for the past two years and eleven months, and if the vehicle is kept in open place, the value of the said vehicle will get deteriorated. Therefore, interim custody may be granted to the petitioner.

7. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the 1^st respondent would submit that the vehicle was illegally used by the accused for the purpose of transporting sand. He would also submit that the model of the vehicle is of the year 2010, and the value of the vehicle comes to Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only). Further, he would submit that the case property was produced before the trial Court in R.P.R.No.14 of 2022.

8. In this case, the vehicle was seized on 15.01.2022. The vehicle is kept in the open place from 15.01.2022 onwards. Further, if the vehicle is kept in open place exposing to sun and rain, the value of the vehicle will be deteriorated and no purpose will be served in keeping the vehicle in custody. The original RC Book of the vehicle has also been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the same has also been verified by this Court. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to allow this revision by following the principle of law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court, in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat [2002 (10) SCC

283].

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed, and the order, dated 09.01.2024, passed in Crl.M.P.No.5290 of 2023 by the Special District Court to Deal with the Cases of Offences in Contrave