Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J
Ganesan – Appellant
Versus
State of TamilNadu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's ownership of the seized vehicle. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. relevant legal provisions for vehicle custody. (Para 6) |
| 3. court's reasoning regarding the vehicle release. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. final order and directives regarding the vehicle return. (Para 10) |
ORDER
Heard Mr.T.Wins, 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Bhoothapandy, dated 23.01.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.474 of 2025, whereby the petition under Section 497 & 503 of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., Ashok Leyland Tipper Lorry, bearing Registration No.TN 75 AX 4981, was rejected on the premise that confiscation proceedings has been initiated in the said case after taking into consideration of the objections raised by the respondent police.
3. Mr.T.Wins, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner would submit that petitioner is owner of the vehicle viz., Ashok Leyland Tipper Lorry, bearing Registration No.TN 75 AX 4981. The said vehicle was seized by the Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.652 of 20
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
