Crl.R.C.No.698 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.02.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

Crl.R.C.No.698 of 2022

Venkatesan

... Petitioner

/vs/

1.State rep by

The Inspector of Police,

Guduvancherry Police Station,

Chengalpattu District,

Cr. No.738 of 2019.

2.The Branch Manager,

Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Ltd.,

Kancheepuram.

... Respondents

PRAYER : Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 r/w.

401 Cr.P.C. to call for the records made in Crl.M.P.No.2974 of 2020 dated

27.11.2020 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu and set aside the same.

For Petitioner

... Mr.C.Mageshkumar

For Respondents

... Mr.V.Meganathan

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

for R1

Page 1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.698 of 2022

ORDER

The Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 r/w.

401 Cr.P.C. to call for the records made in Crl.M.P.No.2974 of 2020 dated

27.11.2020 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu and set aside the same.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner

is the owner of the vehicle namely Tractor attached with Trailor bearing

registration no.TN-21-BY-0187. The respondent police registered a case in

Crime no.738 of 2019 for the offences under Section 430 and 379 IPC r/w

21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act and

seized the vehicle namely Tractor bearing registration no.TN-21-BY-

0187. The petitioner had filed an application in Crl.MP.No.2974 of 2020

for interim custody of the vehicle. The trial Court dismissed the said

application on the ground that the petitioner has failed to prove the

ownership of the Tractor which was seized by the respondent police.

3. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is having R.C.

Book of the vehicle and all the particulars regarding the ownership are

Page 2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.698 of 2022

mentioned in R.C.Book, but the trial Court has failed to consider the said

fact. Hence, the learned counsel has prayed to set aside the interim order

dated 27.11.2020 and grant interim custody of the vehicle and to allow the

revision petition.

4.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned

Government Advocate (Crl.side) has submitted that the registration number

of the vehicle was not mentioned at the time of seizing of the vehicle and

that they seized the vehicle without mentioning the registration number of

the vehicle and after verification only, it was found that the engine number

and chassis number are available. He further submitted that this vehicle

is not involved in similar type of previous case.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on

both sides and perused the entire materials available on record.

6. On perusal of the records, the fact reveals that the petitioner is the

owner of the vehicle, namely Tractor bearing registration no.TN-21-BY-

Page 3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.698 of 2022

0187 and it was seized by the respondent Police in connection with the

case registered in Crime no.738 of 2019 for the offences under Section 430

and 379 IPC r/w 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals(Development &

Regulation) Act. The trail Court had dismissed the said petition on the

ground that the petitioner had not proved the ownership over the vehicle

seized by the respondent Police. Now, the petitioner is ready to produce

the proof with regard to the ownership of the vehicle before the trial Court

and seek the interim custody of the vehicle.

7. At this juncture, it is relevant to refer a decision of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in “Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai and others Vs.