Paramasivam vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep B
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON: 08.10.2026
DELIVERED ON: 16.10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011313332026}
Paramasivam
..Petitioner
Vs
The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Sub -Inspector Of
Police, Kaaraiyur
Police Station,
Pudukkottai District.
Crime No. 28/2026.
..Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Sections 438 & 442 BNSS, to
call for the records and set aside the order in Crl.MP.No.77 of 2026 dated
16.04.2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Ponnamaravathi,
Allow above Criminal Revision, direct to release the petitioners vehicle
bearing register No.TN31 BY 8949.
For Petitioner : Mr.M. Alagan
For Respondent : Mr.D.Venkatesh,
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
Heard and admitted.
__________
Page 1 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
02. With the consent of both parties, this criminal revision was
taken up for final hearing on 08.10.2026.
03. Claiming an order setting aside the dismissal order dated
16.04.2026 of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District, hereinafter referred to as ‘the
trial court’ for the sake of brevity, passed in Crl MP No.77/2026, an
st
application filed by the revision petitioner/ petitioner/1 accused under
S.497 and S.503 BNSS for an order granting him interim custody of a
vehicle, Ashok Leyland Tipper Lorry, bearing registration number TN
31 BY 8949, in RP No.23/2026 involved in Cr No.28/2026 under
S.303(2) BNS and S.21(1)(2) MMDR Act on the file of Kaaraiyur
Police Station, Pudukkottai District, the revision
st
petitioner/petitioner/1 accused has filed this Criminal Revision
Petition under S.438 BNSS.
04. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred
hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking in this
criminal revision, 'the revision petitioner' and 'the revision respondent',
unless the context otherwise requires.
__________
Page 2 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
05. Sans minute details, the case of the revision petitioner in the
trial court is that a vehicle, Ashok Leyland Tipper Lorry, bearing
registration number TN 31 BY 8949, is said to have involved Cr
No.28/2026 under S.303(2) BNS and S.21(1)(2) MMDR Act on the
file of Kaaraiyur Police Station, Pudukkottai District, that in pursuance
of such registration of the criminal case, the aforesaid property has
been seized by the respondent police, that the aforesaid property is now
in the custody of the respondent police but without proper care or
maintenance, that the aforesaid property, if left idle without proper
maintenance, would become useless and ruined and that therefore, the
interim custody of the aforesaid property needs to be granted to the
revision petitioner being its owner.
06. Bereft of unnecessary details, the case of the revision
respondent in the trial court is that if the property concerned is returned
to the revision petitioner, it would be used for the commission of
similar offence or it might be sold by the revision petitioner and that
therefore, this criminal miscellaneous petition seeking such interim
custody of the property concerned deserves for dismissal.
07. Neither the revision petitioner nor the revision respondent
__________
Page 3 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
has chosen to lead any evidence, either oral or documentary, before the
trial court.
08. On enquiry, the trial court has dismissed the criminal
miscellaneous petition in Crl MP No.77/2026 on the finding that this is
a case registered under MMDR Act and that there is a likelihood of
bringing the property for confiscation.
09. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that
the dismissal of the claim of interim custody of the property is not only
against law but also against the settled principles on such grant of
interim custody of the vehicles, that the trial court, without due
application of its judicial mind, has simply accepted the objections
raised by the revision respondent and thereby dismissed the criminal
miscellaneous petition in mechanical manner, that therefore, the order
of the trial court is obviously liable to be interfered with and that
therefore, this criminal revision petition, in the interest of justice, needs
to be allowed, setting aside the order of the trial court and thereby
granting the interim custody of the properties concerned.
10. Learned counsel for the State (Crl Side) appearing for the
__________
Page 4 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
revision respondent would submit that this is a case registered under
MMDR Act, that the investigation is still pending, that if the property
concerned is returned to the revision petitioner, it would be used for
the commission of similar offence or it might be sold by the revision
petitioner, that therefore, the order of the trial court is lawful and
perfect and that therefore, this criminal revision petition deserves for
dismissal in limine .
11. Heard both sides, and perused all material records.
12. On careful consideration of the criminal revision petition
filed by the revision petitioner, the related material records and the
submissions made on both sides, this court formulates the following
point for determination:
Whether the revision petitioner is entitled to get such
order setting aside the dismissal order dated 16.04.2026 of
the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District, in Crl MP
No.77/2026, an application filed by the revision petitioner/
st
petitioner/1 accused under S.497 and S.503 BNSS for an
order granting him interim custody of a vehicle, Ashok
Leyland Tipper Lorry, bearing registration number TN 31
BY 8949, in RP No.23/2026 involved in Cr No.28/2026
__________
Page 5 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
under S.303(2) BNS and S.21(1)(2) MMDR Act on the file
of Kaaraiyur Police Station, Pudukkottai District, as prayed
for?
13. The Point
(1) S.497 BNSS deals inter alia with the custody of the property,
produced before a criminal court, pending investigation, inquiry or
trial. S.498 BNSS deals inter alia with the delivery of the property,
produced before a criminal court, at the conclusion of investigation,
inquiry or trial. S.503 BNSS deals inter alia with the delivery of the
property, not produced before a criminal court.
(2) S.497 BNSS would read as under:
497. Order for custody and disposal of property
pending trial in certain cases.
(1) When any property is produced before any
Criminal Court or the Magistrate empowered to take
cognizance or commit the case for trial during any
investigation, inquiry or trial, the Court or the Magistrate
may make such order as it thinks fit for the proper custody
of such property pending the conclusion of the
investigation, 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 or the Magistrate may, after
recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to
be sold or otherwise disposed of.
__________
Page 6 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
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 offense appears to
have been committed or which appears to have been used
for the commission of any offense.
(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
electronic media, of the property referred to in sub-section (1).
(4)The statement prepared under sub-section (2) and the
photograph or the videography taken under sub-section (3) shall
be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding
under the Sanhita.
(5) The Court or the Magistrate shall, within a period of
thirty days after the statement has been prepared under sub-
section (2) and the photograph or the videography has been
taken under sub-section (3), order the disposal, destruction,
confiscation or delivery of the property in the manner specified
hereinafter.
(3) S.498 BNSS (relevant provisions thereof) would read as
under:
__________
Page 7 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
498. Order for disposal of property at conclusion of trial.
(1)When an investigation, inquiry or trial in any
criminal case is concluded, the Court or the Magistrate
may make such order as it thinks fit for the disposal, by
destruction, confiscation or delivery to any person
claiming to be entitled to possession thereof or otherwise,
of any property or document produced before it or in its
custody, or regarding which any offense appears to have
been committed, or which has been used for the
commission of any offense.
(2)An order may be made under sub-section (1) for
the delivery of any property to any person claiming to be
entitled to the possession thereof, without any condition or
on condition that he executes a bond, with or without
securities, to the satisfaction of the Court or the Magistrate,
engaging to restore such property to the Court if the order
made under sub-section (1) is modified or set aside on
appeal or revision.
…………..
…………..
(4) S.503 BNSS (relevant provision thereof) would read as
under:
503. Procedure by police upon seizure of property.
(1)Whenever the seizure of property by any police officer
is reported to a Magistrate under the provisions of this
Sanhita, and such property is not produced before a
Criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, the Magistrate
may make such order as he thinks fit respecting the
__________
Page 8 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
disposal of such property or the delivery of such property
to the person entitled to the possession thereof, or if such
person cannot be ascertained, respecting the custody and
production of such property.
…………
(5) Therefore, it is clear that S.497, S.498 and S.503 BNSS deal
with the custody or delivery, as the case may be, of the property
involved in a criminal case, and such claim of custody or delivery can
be made by a person entitled to the possession thereof.
(6) A vehicle is said to have involved in this case on hand and
accordingly, the aforesaid property has been seized by the police.
(7) On careful study on the order dated 16.04.2026 of the trial
court passed in Crl.MP No.77/2026, this court finds that the trial court
has dismissed the aforesaid application filed under S.497 BNSS on the
ground that this is a case registered under MMDR Act and that there is
a likelihood of bringing the property for confiscation.
(8) At this juncture, this court would like to refer to the decision
of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai V State of
__________
Page 9 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
Gujarat ((2002) 10 SCC 283) and the relevant portion thereof would
read as under:
' 17 . In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no
use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a
long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate
orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and
guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles,
if required at any point of time. This can be done pending
hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.'
(9) Selvam V State by Inspector of Police (2012 (1) MWN
(Cr) 288) is also a case where this court, while dealing with the return
of a vehicle to the claimant/accused has held as under:
' 6 ……………, it would be seen that in
directing return of vehicles, even to Accused persons, in
the manner contemplated in the decisions of the Apex
Court of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai V State of Gujarat,
2003 (1) CTC 175 and General Insurance Council and
others V State of Andhra Pradesh and others, 2010 (6)
SCC 768, no trampling of powers bestowed upon the trial
Courts under Section 452 CrPC is involved. Therefore, it
would be fit and proper to deal with applications seeking
return of vehicles without being clouded with the vision of
the claimant being an Accused.'
(10) Incidentally, this court would like to refer to the recent
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.Manimaran V State of
__________
Page 10 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
Tamil Nadu (2026 INSC 946) , where it has been held as under:
‘13. It cannot be forgotten that the vehicle kept in
the custody of the Police or the Court, during the
pendency of the trial, may deteriorate and become
unusable in the long run.’
(11) It is therefore clear that keeping a vehicle involved in an
offence, either in police station or in court, for a long time is not
warranted and that an application seeking the interim custody of the
vehicle needs to be dealt with judiciously and expeditiously, regardless
of the fact that the applicant is the accused in the offence concerned.
(12) No confiscation proceedings are reported to have been
initiated against the vehicle concerned.
(13) Resultantly, this court holds that the revision petitioner is
entitled to get the interim custody of the vehicle in such terms as
detailed hereunder, and this point is decided accordingly.
14. In the result,
(1) that this criminal revision petition filed by the revision
st
petitioner/ petitioner/1 accused is hereby allowed,
__________
Page 11 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
(2) that the order dated 16.04.2026 of the District Munsif cum
Judicial Magistrate, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District, in Crl.MP
No.77/2026 is hereby reversed,
(3) that the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl.MP
No.77/2026 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District, is hereby allowed but on the
conditions,
st
(i) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/1 accused
shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- with
two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of
the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District,
st
(ii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/1 accused
shall file into the court of the District Munsif cum
Judicial Magistrate, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai
District, the photographs showing all the four sides of
the vehicle along with the original registration
certificate, and
st
(iii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/1 accused,
in view of the prayer of ‘interim custody’, shall
execute an undertaking, in the form of an affidavit,
before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
__________
Page 12 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District, to the effect that
he shall produce the vehicle, as it is, before the court
as and when directed,
(4) that the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Ponnamaravathi,
Pudukkottai District, is hereby directed to hand over the vehicle
st
concerned to the revision petitioner/petitioner/1 accused only after the
st
compliance by the revision petitioner/petitioner/1 accused of the
aforesaid conditions.
16-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
GNS
__________
Page 13 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate Court,
Ponnamaravathi,
2.The Sub -Inspector Of Police,
Kaaraiyur Police Station,
Pudukkottai District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 14 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
B.MURUGESAN, J.
GNS
Pre-Delivery Order
CRL RC(MD) No. 1642 of 2026
16-10-2026
__________
Page 15 of 15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )