Palanichamy vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By In
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON: 07.10.2026
DELIVERED ON: 16.10.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
Palanichamy ...Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Tamilnadu,
The Inspector of Police,
Tenkasi Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
(Crime No.368 of 2025) ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Section 438 and 442 BNSS to call
for the entire records pertaining to the order passed by the learned
Principal Special Judge for NDPS Act case, at Madurai in Crl.M.P.No.
3714 of 2025 vide order dated 30.09.2025 and set aside the same and
consequently direct the learned Principal Special Judge for NDPS Act
case, at Madurai to hand over the petitioner Apple I Phone 13 128 GB
blue and HSN 856171300 kept in the custody of the above said Judicial
Magistrate Court in connection with the case in Crime No.368 of 2025 on
the file of the respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Prakash
1/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
For Respondent : Mrs.V.Moushica,
Counsel for State of TN(Crl.Side)
ORDER
Heard and admitted.
02. With the consent of both parties, this criminal revision was taken
up for final hearing on 07.10.2026.
03. Claiming an order setting aside the dismissal order dated
30.09.2025 of the Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for
NDPS Act cases, Madurai, hereinafter referred to as ‘the special court’ for
the sake of brevity, passed in Crl MP No.3714/2025, an application filed by
the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused under S.497 r/w S.503 BNSS for an
order granting him interim custody of a mobile phone, Apple iPhone 13 128
GB, involved in Cr No.368/2025 under S.8(c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (B) NDPS Act
and S.25(1-B) Arms Act, on the file of Tenkasi Police Station, Tenkasi
District, the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused has filed this Criminal
Revision Petition under S.438 BNSS.
2/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
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.
05. Sans minute details, the case of the revision petitioner in the special
court is that a mobile phone, Apple iPhone 13 128 GB, is said to have
involved in Cr No.368/2025 under S.8(c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (B) NDPS Act and S.
25(1-B) Arms Act, on the file of Tenkasi Police Station, Tenkasi District, that
in pursuance of such registration of the criminal case, the aforesaid mobile
phone has been seized by the respondent police, that the aforesaid mobile
phone is now in the custody of the respondent police but without proper care
or maintenance, that the aforesaid mobile phone, if left idle without proper
maintenance, would become useless and ruined, that the aforesaid mobile
phone had been used for domestic bank transactions, that the aforesaid
mobile phone has various contact numbers, and that therefore, the interim
custody of the aforesaid mobile phone needs to be granted to the revision
petitioner being its owner.
3/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
06. Bereft of unnecessary details, the case of the revision respondent in
the special court is that if the mobile phone 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 mobile phone
concerned deserves for dismissal.
07. Neither the revision petitioner nor the revision respondent has
chosen to lead any evidence, either oral or documentary, before the special
court.
08. On enquiry, the special court has dismissed the criminal
miscellaneous petition in Crl MP No.3714/2025 on the finding that there is
no proof for the ownership of the mobile phone, that the mobile phone used
for the commission of offence under NDPS Act is liable to confiscation under
S.60(1) NDPS Act and that the conditions under S.60(3) NDPS Act are to be
complied with.
4/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
09. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the
revision petitioner is the owner of the mobile phone, the aforesaid mobile
phone had been used for domestic bank transactions, that the aforesaid
mobile phone has various contact numbers, that the dismissal of the claim of
interim custody of the mobile phone is not only against law but also against
the settled principles on such grant of interim custody of the vehicles and
articles, that the special 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 special court is obviously liable to be
interfered with, that the purchase receipt of the mobile phone in the name of
the revision petitioner is filed in this criminal revision and that therefore, this
criminal revision petition, in the interest of justice, needs to be allowed,
setting aside the order of the special court and thereby granting the interim
custody of the mobile phone concerned.
10. Learned counsel for the State (Crl Side) appearing for the revision
respondent would submit that this is a case where the revision petitioner is
alleged to have committed offences under NDPS Act, that the mobile phone
would have played a vital role in the offence concerned, that if the mobile
5/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
phone 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 since the offences are under NDPS Act, S.60 NDPS Act
would come to play as held by the special court, that therefore, the order of
the special 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 30.09.2025 of the special court in Crl MP No.
3714/2025, an application filed by the revision petitioner/petitioner/ accused
under S.497 r/w S.503 BNSS for an order granting him interim custody of a
mobile phone, Apple iPhone 13 128 GB, involved in Cr No.368/2025 under
S.8(c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (B) NDPS Act and S.25(1-B) Arms Act, on the file of
6/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
Tenkasi Police Station, Tenkasi 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
7/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
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 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.
8/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
(3) S.498 BNSS (relevant provisions thereof) would read as under:
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 offence appears to have been
committed, or which has been used for the commission of
any offence.
(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
9/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
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 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 mobile phone 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 30.09.2025 of the special court
passed in Crl MP No.3714/2025, this court finds that the special court has
dismissed the aforesaid application filed under S.497 BNSS on the ground
that that there is no proof for the ownership of the mobile phone, that the
mobile phone used for the commission of offence under NDPS Act is liable
to confiscation under S.60(1) NDPS Act and that the conditions under S.
60(3) NDPS Act are to be complied with.
10/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
(8) Of course, a copy of the purchase receipt of the mobile phone in the
name of the revision petitioner has been filed in this criminal revision.
(9) From the Explanation to S.497 (1) BNSS, it is clear that even a
mobile phone which is said to have involved in the commission of an offence
is also a property like vehicle.
(10) Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai V State of Gujarat ((2002) 10 SCC
283) is a case where the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with a vehicle
as a property, has held 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.'
(11) 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
11/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
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.'
(12) Pertinently, this court would like to refer to the recent decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.Manimaran V State of 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. It is
hence the finding of this Court in Biswajit Dey that the
provisions of Sections 451 and 457 of the CrPC (or the
analogous provisions of the BNSS) can be invoked even in
NDPS cases . (italics supplied this court)
(13) It is therefore clear that keeping a property, be it a vehicle or a
mobile phone, 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 such property needs to be dealt with judiciously and
expeditiously, regardless of the fact that the applicant is the accused in the
offence concerned.
12/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
(14) A mobile phone has become indispensable nowadays, serving as a
primary gateway to the internet, powering digital payments and banking, and
connecting people globally.
(15) No confiscation proceedings are reported to have been initiated
against the mobile phone concerned.
(16) Scientific examination of the mobile phone is also not required as
reported on the side of the revision respondent.
(17) Resultantly, this court holds that the revision petitioner is entitled
to get the interim custody of the mobile phone 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 petitioner/
petitioner/accused is hereby allowed,
(2) that the order dated 30.09.2025 of the Additional District Judge,
Principal Special Court for NDPS Act cases, Madurai, in Crl MP No.
3714/2025 is hereby reversed,
13/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
(3) that the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl MP No.3714/2025
on the file of the Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for NDPS
Act cases, Madurai, is hereby allowed but on the conditions,
(i) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused
shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- with two
sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the
Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for
NDPS Act cases, Madurai,
(ii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused
shall file into the court of the Additional District Judge,
Principal Special Court for NDPS Act cases, Madurai, the
photographs showing all sides of the mobile phone
concerned, and
(iii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused, in
view of the prayer of ‘interim custody’, shall execute an
undertaking, in the form of an affidavit, before the
Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for
NDPS Act cases, Madurai, to the effect that he shall
produce the mobile, as it is , before the court as and when
directed,
14/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
(4) that the Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for
NDPS Act cases, Madurai, is hereby directed to hand over the mobile phone
concerned to the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused only after the
compliance by the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused of the aforesaid
conditions.
16 .10.2026
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
gns
To
1.The Principal Special Judge for NDPS Act case,
at Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Tenkasi Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
15/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
B.MURUGESAN, J.
gns
Pre-Delivery Order made in
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1494 of 2025
16.10.2026
16/ 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:50:46 pm )