G.Suman vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep B
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 06.10.2026
DELIVERED ON: 16.10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011045632026}
G.Suman
..Petitioner
Vs
The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of
Police, Panagudi
Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.819 of 2026)
..Respondent
PRAYER: C-45R. To call for the records relating to the impugned order
of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor in Crl.MP.No.525 of 2026
dated 15.07.2026 and to set aside the same and consequently direct the
respondent to handover the petitioners Vehicle bearing Registration
Number TN 20 AU 8889 (Tipper), TN 72 DU 0351 (TVS Jupiter), TN 72
DX 4102 (Honda Dio), Vivo and Motorola Cellphones and recovered
amount Rs.7,500/- and allow this revision petition.
For Petitioner: Mr.S.Suresh Manickam
For Respondent: Mr.V.Moushica,
Counsel for State of TN (Crl.side)
__________
Page 1 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
ORDER
Heard and admitted.
02. With the consent of both parties, this criminal revision was
taken up for final hearing on 28.09.2026.
03. Claiming an order setting aside the dismissal order dated
15.07.2026 of the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, hereinafter referred to
as ‘the trial court’ for the sake of brevity, passed in Crl MP
No.525/2026, an application filed by the revision
petitioner/petitioner/accused under S.497 BNSS for an order granting
him interim custody of three vehicles, Tipper (TN 20 AU 8889), TVS
Jupiter (TN 72 DU 0351) and Honda Dio (TN 72 DX 4102), two
mobile phones, VIVO and MOTO, and a cash of Rs.7,500/-, the
properties in PR No.268/2026 involved in Cr No.819/2026 under S.123
BNS r/w S.24(1) COTP Act, on the file of Panagudi Police Station,
Tirunelveli District, the revision petitioner/petitioner/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
__________
Page 2 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
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 three vehicles, Tipper (TN 20 AU 8889), TVS Jupiter
(TN 72 DU 0351) and Honda Dio (TN 72 DX 4102), two mobile
phones, VIVO and MOTO, and a cash of Rs.7,500/-, are said to have
involved in Cr No.819/2026 under S.123 BNS r/w S.24(1) COTP Act,
on the file of Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District, that in
pursuance of such registration of the criminal case, the aforesaid
properties have been seized by the respondent police, that the aforesaid
properties are now in the interim custody of the respondent police but
without proper care or maintenance, that the aforesaid properties, if left
idle without proper maintenance, would become useless and ruined and
that therefore, the interim custody of the aforesaid properties needs to
be granted to the revision petitioner being the owner thereof.
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 properties concerned are returned to the revision petitioner,
they would be used for the commission of similar offence or they
__________
Page 3 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
might be sold by the revision petitioner and that therefore, this criminal
miscellaneous petition seeking such interim custody of the properties
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.525/2026 on the finding that the
revision petitioner is alleged to have committed the offences involving
a huge quantity of the banned products.
09. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that
the dismissal of the claim of interim custody of the properties is not
only against law but also against the settled principles on such grant of
interim custody of the properties, 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
__________
Page 4 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
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
revision respondent would submit that this is a case where the revision
petitioner is alleged to have committed the offences involving a huge
quantity of the banned products, that the revision petitioner is a
habitual offender having similar cases, that the properties, particularly,
the mobile phones, would have played a vital role in the offences
concerned, that the mobiles phones are required for scientific analysis,
that if the properties concerned are returned to the revision petitioner,
they would be used for the commission of similar offence or they
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. In reply, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, by
filing a memo, would restrict his claim only with respect to those three
vehicles.
12. Heard both sides, and perused all material records.
__________
Page 5 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
13. On careful consideration of the criminal revision petition
filed by the revision petitioner, the counter filed by the revision
respondent, 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 15.07.2026 of the
trial court in Crl MP No.525/2026, an application filed by
the revision petitioner/petitioner/ accused under S.497
BNSS for an order granting him interim custody of three
vehicles, Tipper (TN 20 AU 8889), TVS Jupiter (TN 72 DU
0351) and Honda Dio (TN 72 DX 4102), the properties in
PR No.268/2026 involved in Cr No.819/2026 under S.123
BNS r/w S.24(1) COTP Act, on the file of Panagudi Police
Station, Tirunelveli District, as prayed for?
14. 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.
__________
Page 6 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
(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.
(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
__________
Page 7 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
(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 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.
__________
Page 8 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
…………..
…………..
(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) Three vehicles are said to have involved in this case on hand
and accordingly, the aforesaid properties have been seized by the
police.
__________
Page 9 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
(7) On careful study on the order dated 15.07.2026 of the trial
court passed in Crl MP No.525/2026, this court finds that the trial court
has dismissed the aforesaid application filed under S.497 BNSS on the
ground that the revision petitioner is alleged to have committed the
offences involving a huge quantity of the banned products.
(8) In view of the memo filed on behalf of the revision petitioner
restricting his claim only with respect to those three vehicles, this court
is concerned with interim custody of the vehicles only.
(9) 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.'
(10) Selvam V State by Inspector of Police (2012 (1) MWN
__________
Page 10 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
(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.'
(11) 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.’
(12) 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
__________
Page 11 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
of the fact that the applicant is the accused in the offence concerned.
(13) Resultantly, this court holds that the revision petitioner is
entitled to get the interim custody of those three vehicles, but not of the
mobile phones and the cash, in such terms as detailed hereunder, and
this point is decided accordingly.
15. In the result,
(1) that this criminal revision petition filed by the revision
petitioner/ petitioner/accused is hereby partly allowed only with respect
to the vehicles , Tipper (TN 20 AU 8889), TVS Jupiter (TN 72 DU
0351) and Honda Dio (TN 72 DX 4102),
(2) that the order dated 15.07.2026 of the Judicial Magistrate,
Valliyoor, in Crl MP No.525/2026, is hereby reversed only with
respect to those vehicles ,
(3) that the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl MP
No.525/2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, is hereby
allowed only with respect to those vehicles but on the conditions,
(i) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused shall
__________
Page 12 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
execute a bond for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- with two
sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the
Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor,
(ii) that the revision petitioner/petitioner/accused shall file
into the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, the
photographs showing all the four sides of the vehicles along
with the original registration certificates, 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 Judicial Magistrate,
Valliyoor, to the effect that he shall produce the vehicles, as
it is , before the court as and when directed,
(4) that the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, is hereby directed to
hand over the vehicles concerned to the revision
petitioner/petitioner/accused only after the compliance by the revision
petitioner/petitioner/accused of the aforesaid conditions, and
(5) that this criminal revision petition is hereby dismissed with respect
to the mobile phones , VIVO and MOTO, and the cash of Rs.7,500/-.
16-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
__________
Page 13 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
GNS
__________
Page 14 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor
2.The Inspector Of Police, Panagudi
Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.819 of 2026)
__________
Page 15 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
B.MURUGESAN, J.
GNS
CRL RC(MD) No. 1269 of 2026
16-10-2026
__________
Page 16 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 08:22:15 pm )