Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 10197 Mad
Judgement Date : 21 April, 2021
Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
P.Jagadesan ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Station House Officer,
Nettapakkam Police Station,
Puduchery. ... Respondent
(Crime No.198 of 2020)
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside
the order dated 09.03.2021, passed in Crl.M.P.No.711 of 2021, on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pondicherry and direct the respondent to return the
Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-7822, to the
petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.Anbalagan
For Respondent : Mr.D.Bharathachakravarthy
Public Prosecutor (Pondicherry)
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
ORDER
By consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter is taken
up today for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The present Criminal Revision Case has been filed against the order
dated 09.03.2021, passed by the learnd Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pondicherry in
Crl.M.P.No.711 of 2021, dismissing the petition filed under Section 451 of
Cr.P.C, seeking return of the Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire Car bearing registration
No.TN-31-AJ-7822, to the petitioner.
3. The respondent-Police has seized a Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire Car
bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-7822, belonging to the petitioner in connection
with the case registered in Crime No.198 of 2020 on its file for offence under
Sections 341, 323, 324, 364(A) and 397 of IPC. Hence, the petitioner has moved
Crl.M.P.No.711 of 2021 in Crime No.198 of 2020, before the learned Judicial
Magistrate-I, Pondicherry, seeking return of the vehicle. Such petition came to
be dismissed under orders of the Court below dated 09.03.2020. Hence, this
revision.
http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner
is involved in the buying and selling of used cars and during the course of
business, one Arumugam, approached the petitioner for selling his Maruti Suzuki
Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-7822 and sold the same to the
petitioner and signed all the necessary papers and handed over all the original
documents pertaining to the car, and in exchange purchased purchased Mahindra
XUV500 W8 car from the petitioner, later, as an afterthought gave a compliant
of kidnapping after a delay of 4 days and on that basis, the respondent herein
had recovered the card from the petitioner on 06.01.2021. It is further
submitted that the petitioner was innocent bonafide buyer and redeem the sale
consideration paid by him only by selling the said Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire Car
bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-7822. However, the learned Judge,
erroneously rejected the petition filed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. In support
of his contentions, the learned counsel has relied upon the Judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil Vs.
State of Mysore [1977 4 SCC 358]; Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of
Gujarat [(2002) 10 SCC 283]; General Insurance Council and Ors. Vs. State of
Andhara Pradesh and Ors. [(2010) 6 SCC 768].
http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that if
the Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-7822 is
returned to the petitioner, he will not produce the same during the trial period,
since he himself has admitted that as per his nature of business, the said car
was purchased by him as a mediator for buying and selling used cars and he may
not be in a position to retain the same for long time as he had to sell the car to
realize the sale consideration paid by him to Arumugam for purchasing the
alleged property, failing which, he will be put to irreparable loss and hardship.
Further, the said Arumugam had also filed a petition for interim custody of the
alleged car bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-7822 before the trial Court in
Crl.M.P.No.1146 of 2021 and the same is pending and further, there is a dispute
regarding the ownership of the property and if the property is returned, the
petitioner may not retain it and produce the same during trial, and therefore,
the learned Magistrate, on proper appreciation of materials, rightly dismissed
the petition, and as such, no interference is required.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor (Pondicherry) for the respondent and perused the materials
available on record.
http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
7. Admittedly, a case was registered by the respondent-Police in Crime
No.198 of 2020 on its file for offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 364(A) and
397 of IPC and during the pendency of the investigation, the respondent-Police
has seized a Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.TN-31-AJ-
7822, belonging to the petitioner. It could be seen from the records both the
petitioner herein and Arumugam, who sold the alleged car to the petitioner
herein, have approached the learned Magistrate, for the interim custody of the
vehicle. The present petition is challenged by the petitioner for the dismissal of
the petition filed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. by the learned Magistrate. The
petition filed by the erstwhile owner-Arumugam in Cr.M.P.No.1146 of 2021
before the learned Magistrate is still pending, and the same can be concluded
only after trial.
8. Though the learned counsel for petitioner, by referring the decisions of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, submitted that the vehicle cannot be kept in open
space, if it is kept in open space, and exposed to sun light and rain, it would
lose its value, and therefore it has to be returned, however, the said decisions
would not applicable to the present case on hand, as admittedly, the
investigation is not yet completed and the charge sheet also yet to be filed and
http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
if the vehicle is released, there would be a possibility for changing the engine
and chassis number, which would defeat the entire case of the prosecution, and
therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant relief to the petitioner. Further,
during the investigation, releasing of the vehicle is purely discretionary power of
the Court. Unless any arbitrariness or malafides found, the revision Court need
not interfere with the order passed by the Court below.
9. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to exercise discretionary
power and there is no illegality or perversity in the order passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry. In fine, the Criminal Revision Petition is
dismissed.
21.04.2021
Speaking Order / Non-speaking order
Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes.
rns
http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pondicherry.
2.The Station House Officer, Nettapakkam Police Station, Puduchery.
3.The Government Advocate (Criminal Side), Madras High Court.
http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
rns
Crl.R.C.No.215 of 2021
21.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!