BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 15.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

Vinoth ... Petitioner

Vs

State of Tamilnadu Rep by

Inspector of Police,

Vellankanni Police Station,

Nagapattinam District,

Crime No.280 of 2025. ... Respondent

Prayer: This Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 24.11.2025 in Crl.M.P.No. 6184 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur and set aside the

same.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

Heard Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner and Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for Respondent.

2. The present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order of Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, dated 24.11.2025 in Crl.M.P.No. 6184/2025, whereby the petition filed by petitioner under Sections 497 and 503(2) of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., Maruthi Swift Dzire Car, bearing Registration No.TN 16 Z 9902, was rejected on the premise that petitioner had not disputed the fact that his car was used to convey ganja, nor had he established how the vehicle came into the accused's custody or demonstrated that he had no connivance with the accused in the conveyance of ganja.

3. Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner would submit that petitioner claims to be owner of the vehicle viz., Maruthi Swift Dzire Car, bearing Registration No.TN 16 Z 9902. The said vehicle was seized by the Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.280 of 2025 for offence Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act alleging that petitioner was illegally transporting 1.100 grams of Ganja. Petitioner has filed Crl.MP.No.

6184 of 2025 before Additional District Judge/presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, to grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was dismissed by the court below by the impugned order dated 24.11.2025 for the reasons stated supra. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed.

4. Learned Counsel for Petitioner would further submit that petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and that he would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In support thereof, he produced registration certificate of said vehicle and the same was perused by Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for Respondent, who confirmed that petitioner is the owner of the subject vehicle.

5. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the said vehicle may be released subject to conditions and in case, confiscation proceedings are being initiated, petitioner must co-operate and the same was agreed to by learned counsel for Revision Petitioner.

6. 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 produced before the Court or which is in its custody, (b) any property regarding which an offence appears to have been committed or which appears to have been used for the commission of any offence.

(2) The Court or the Magis