BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.O.P.(MD).Nos.21910 of 2025 P.Sanjaykumar ... Petitioner / Owner of the Vehicle Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep . by The Inspector of Police, Puliyangudi Police Station, Tenkasi District.

Crime No.392/2024 ... Respondent / Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records connected with the order in Crl.RC.No.2 of 2025 dated 13.06.2025 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi, confirming the order in Crl.M.P.No.2327 of 2024 dated 07.12.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, and set aside the same, consequently directing the respondent to entrust the interim custody of the Auto bearing registration No.TN 76 X 3745 to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Malaikani For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

Preface:

This Criminal Original Petition is directed against the concurrent orders passed by the Courts below refusing interim custody of a seized vehicle, solely on the premise that steps for confiscation have been initiated under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioner, being the registered owner of the vehicle, seeks interference of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that the refusal to grant interim custody is contrary to settled legal principles and results in grave prejudice.

Case of the prosecution:

2. The case of the prosecution is that on receipt of information regarding two persons allegedly selling ganja using an autorickshaw, the respondent police proceeded to a place near an overhead water tank situated west of Subbulingam Higher Secondary School.

3. It is alleged that the petitioner and one Ayyanar were found in possession of 50 grams of ganja each, whereupon a case came to be registered in Crime No.392 of 2024 for offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 132 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (corresponding to Sections 294(b), 353 and 506(ii) IPC) and Section

8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act.

4. According to the prosecution, Accused No.1 allegedly confessed to having procured the contraband from Chengalpattu and to having used the autorickshaw bearing Registration No. TN 76 X

3745 for transportation and sale.

5. The said autorickshaw was seized and produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, and was assigned P.R. No.506 of 2024.

Procedural history:

6. The petitioner, being the registered owner of the vehicle, filed Cr.M.P. No.2327 of 2024 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, seeking interim custody of the autorickshaw.

7. By order dated 07.12.2024, the learned Judicial Magistrate dismissed the petition on the ground that the prosecution had initiated steps for confiscation and, therefore, the petition was not maintainable.

8. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred Crl.R.C.

No.2 of 2025 before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi. The Revisional Court, by order dated 13.06.2025, confirmed the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, holding that since confiscation proceedings were stated to be pending, interim custody could not be granted. Challenging the concurrent findings, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present Criminal Original Petition.

Grounds for quash:

9. The petitioner assails the impugned orders on the following grounds:

a) The Courts below failed to appreciate that mere initiation or proposal for confiscation cannot bar grant of interim custody.

b) The petitioner, being the registered owner, has a superior possessory right pending trial.

c) Confiscation under the NDPS Act can be ordered only upon culmination of trial and proof of guilt.

d) The reliance placed on the decision in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.41 of

2019 dated 16.06.2023 is wholly misconceived and mechanically applied.

e) Continued rete