DATED : 28.08.2023
CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Crl.R.C.No.1460 of 2023
Introduction:
The case of Aruppusamy v. State by Inspector of Police revolves around a criminal revision petition filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The petitioner seeks to challenge the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalapet, in Crl.M.P.No.3973/2023. The central issue in this case pertains to the return of a seized tipper lorry, bearing registration number TN21-AW-1739, which was involved in a criminal case under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
Factual Background:
On April 12, 2023, revenue officials conducting field inspection at Andiyakavundanur Village, Udumalapet Sub Division, seized two tipper lorries, including the petitioner’s lorry, for allegedly transporting gravel sand without a license. A complaint was lodged with the Inspector of Police, Amaravathi Nagar Police Station, leading to the registration of FIR Crime No.48 of 2023. The petitioner, Aruppusamy, filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.3973/2023 before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalapet, seeking the return of his tipper lorry.
Legal Issues:
Return of Seized Property: The primary legal issue is whether the petitioner is entitled to the return of his seized tipper lorry while the criminal case is ongoing.
Applicability of Precedents: The court must consider the relevant legal precedents and their applicability to determine whether the petitioner’s request for the return of the vehicle is justified.
Arguments:
The petitioner’s counsel argued that Aruppusamy is the owner of the tipper lorry and is not directly involved in the alleged offence. The petitioner contended that keeping the lorry in an open space for an extended period could lead to its value diminishing over time. Therefore, the petitioner sought the return of the vehicle to him.
The Government Advocate (Criminal Side) did not raise substantial objections to the return of the vehicle.
Court’s Decision:
The court referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai and others v. State of Gujarat (2002) 10 SCC 283. The Supreme Court’s decision emphasized the importance of promptly resolving the issue of seized vehicles and highlighted that extended retention of such vehicles at police stations is unnecessary. The court directed that appropriate orders for the return of seized vehicles should be passed, taking into consideration necessary guarantees and security measures.
Based on the Supreme Court’s reasoning and to ensure fairness and prompt resolution, the court allowed the criminal revision case. It set aside the order dated July 19, 2023, passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalapet. The court directed the Judicial Magistrate to return the tipper lorry to the petitioner, subject to specific conditions that include proving ownership, executing a bond, preparing a panchanama, taking photographs, and an undertaking not to misuse the vehicle for illegal activities.
Analysis:
The case reflects the court’s commitment to balancing the interests of justice with the rights of property owners. The court’s reliance on the Supreme Court’s decision in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai showcases its adherence to established legal principles.
The court’s emphasis on promptly resolving the matter of seized vehicles aligns with the principles of efficiency and fairness. By setting specific conditions for the return of the tipper lorry, the court ensures that the petitioner’s rights are protected while also safeguarding the interests of justice.
Conclusion:
Aruppusamy v. State by Inspector of Police highlights the significance of addressing the timely return of seized property during ongoing criminal cases. The court’s decision, grounded in legal precedents and principles, demonstrates its commitment to providing equitable solutions that consider both the interests of justice and the rights of property owners. This case underscores the importance of applying established legal principles to achieve a balanced and just outcome.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Shreeya S Shekar
