BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ CRL.R.C.(MD)No.1447 of 2025 Sujin ... Petitioner vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Aralvaimozhi Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.544/2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records and set aside the order in Crl.M.P.No.348 of 2025 passed by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Bhoothapandy, dated 07.10.2025 and order interim custody of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-75-BA-3444 seized by the respondent on 18.07.2025 in Crime No.544 of 2025, to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Krishna Kumar For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

Heard Mr.S.Krishnakumar, learned counsel for revision petitioner and Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for respondent.

2. Present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order dated 07.10.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.348 of 2025 passed by District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Bhoothapandy, whereby, the petition under Section 497 and 503 of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., lorry bearing Registration No.TN 75 BA 3444, was rejected on the premise that the vehicle is liable for confiscation and that there is no merit in the petition.

3. Learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner would submit that petitioner is owner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 75 BA 3444. The said vehicle was seized by Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.544 of 2025 dated 18.07.2025 for offence punishable under Section 223 of BNS, alleging that petitioner illegally transported 8 units of M-sand. Petitioner has filed Crl.M.P.No.348 of 2025 before District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Bhoothapandy, to grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was dismissed by the Court below by the impugned order dated 07.10.2025 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 said vehicle and he would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In support thereof, he produced the copy of Registration Certificate of said vehicle and the same was perused by Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent, who confirmed that Registration Certification stands in the name of petitioner.

5. Learned Government Advocate 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 Magistrate shall, within a period of fourteen days from the production of the property referred to in sub-section (1) before it, prepare a statement of such property containing its