BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.02.2026 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Balamurugan ..Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamilnadu, Rep By Inspector of Police, Andipatti Police Station, Theni District.

Crime No.830 of 2020. ..Respondent PRAYER: To call for the records relating to the order passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Andipatti in Crl.M.P. No. 3399 of 2025 dt. 18.12.2025 set aside the same and allow this revision petition and thus render justice.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Maheswaran For Respondent : Mr.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate

ORDER

Heard Mr.R.Maheswaran, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner and Mr.Vaikkam Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for Respondent.

2. The present Criminal Revision case has been filed to set aside the order of Judicial Magistrate Court, Andipatti in Crl.M.P.No.3399 of 2025 dated 18.12.2025, whereby the petition under Section 497 and 503 of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., Ashok Leyland Tipper 2012 Model bearing Registration No.TN 21 AL 4351, was rejected.

3. Mr.R.Maheswaran, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner would submit that petitioner is owner of the vehicle viz., Ashok Leyland Tipper 2012 Model bearing Registration No.TN 21 AL 4351. The said vehicle was seized by Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.830 of 2020, dated 31.07.2020 for offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC and Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 alleging that petitioner illegally transported 2 units of gravel sand. Petitioner has filed Crl.MP.No.3399 of 2025 before Judicial Magistrate Court, Andipatti, to grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was dismissed by the Court below by impugned order dated 18.12.2025. 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.Vaikkam Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent, who confirmed that Registration Certificate stands in the name of petitioner.

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 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 description in such form and manner as the State Government may, by rules, provide.

(3)The Court or the Magistrate shall cause to be taken the photograph and if necessary, videograph on mobile phone or any electr