Sivaraj vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Th
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved On: 13.10.2026
Delivered On: 30.10.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011440302026}
Sivaraj ... Petitioner
Vs.
State Of Tamilnadu Rep By
The Sub Inspector Of Police,
Puliangudi Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
Crime No.407 of 2026. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Section 438 & 442 BNSS, to set
aside the order dated 17.08.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.825 of 2026 on the
file of the Additional Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, Tenkasi
District and allow the above criminal revision.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kasirajan
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 13.10.2026.
__________
Page 1 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
03. Claiming an order setting aside the dismissal order dated
17.08.2026 of the Additional District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Sivagiri, hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’ for the sake of
brevity, passed in Crl.MP.No.825/2026, an application filed by the
revision petitioner/petitioner/A1 under S.497 BNSS for an order
granting him interim custody of a vehicle, Mahindra Swaraj Tractor,
bearing registration number TN 94 D 0955, the property in PR
No.192/2026 involved in Cr No.407/2026 under S.303(2) BNS on the
file of Puliyangudi Police Station, the revision petitioner/ petitioner/A1
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.
05. Sans minute details, the case of the revision petitioner in the
trial court is that a vehicle, Mahindra Swaraj Tractor, bearing
registration number TN 94 D 0955, is said to have involved in Cr
No.407/2026 under S.303(2) BNS on the file of Puliyangudi Police
Station, that in pursuance of such registration of the criminal case, the
__________
Page 2 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
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 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 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
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.825/2026 on the finding that the
__________
Page 3 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
investigation is still pending and 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.
09. Heard both sides, and perused all the materials available.
10. 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 property concerned.
11. Learned counsel for the State (Crl Side) appearing for the
revision respondent would submit 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
__________
Page 4 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
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 .
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 17.08.2026 of
the trial court in Crl MP No.825/2026, an application filed
by the revision petitioner/petitioner/A1 under S.497 BNSS
for an order granting him interim custody of a vehicle,
Mahindra Swaraj Tractor, bearing registration number TN
94 D 0955, the property in PR No.192/2006 involved in Cr
No.407/2026 under S.303(2) BNS on the file of
Puliyangudi Police Station, 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,
__________
Page 5 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
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.
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.
__________
Page 6 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
(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:
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
__________
Page 7 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
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 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.
__________
Page 8 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
(7) On careful study on the order dated 19.09.2026 of the trial
court passed in Crl MP No.825/2026, this court finds that the trial court
has dismissed the aforesaid application filed under S.497 BNSS on the
ground that the investigation is still pending and 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.
(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
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:
__________
Page 9 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
' 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
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.
__________
Page 10 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
(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
petitioner/ petitioner/A1 is hereby allowed,
(2) that the order dated 17.08.2026 of the Additional District
Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, in Crl.MP.No.825/2026 is
hereby reversed,
(3) that the criminal miscellaneous petition in
Crl.MP.No.825/2026 on the file of the Additional District Munsif cum
Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, is hereby allowed but on the conditions,
(i) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/A1 shall execute a
bond for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- with two sureties for the like
sum each to the satisfaction of the Additional District Munsif
cum Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri,
(ii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/A1 shall file into the
__________
Page 11 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
court of the Additional District Munsif cum Judicial
Magistrate, Sivagiri, the photographs showing all the four
sides of the vehicle along with the original registration
certificate, and
(iii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/A1, in view of the
prayer of ‘interim custody’, shall execute an undertaking, in
the form of an affidavit, before the Additional District
Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, to the effect that he
shall produce the vehicle, as it is, before the court as and
when directed,
(4) that the Additional District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Sivagiri, is hereby directed to hand over the vehicle concerned to the
revision petitioner/petitioner/A1 only after the compliance by the
revision petitioner/petitioner/A1 of the aforesaid conditions.
30.10.2026
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
gns
__________
Page 12 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
To
1.The Additional District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,
Sivagiri.
2.The Sub Inspector Of Police,
Puliangudi Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 13 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1660 of 2026
B.MURUGESAN, J.
gns
Order made in
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1660 of 2026
30.10.2026
__________
Page 14 / 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:02 am )