B.SATHYAKALA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed to set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate-I, Alandur in Crl.MP.No.31 of 2020 dated 20.01.2020.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has purchased the Two Wheeler bearing Regn.No.TN-85-D- 4808 on 05.12.2016 itself. He further submitted that the respondent has registered an FIR against the petitioner's husband only on 27.02.2019 in Crime No.43 of 2019 under Section 379 of IPC alleging that the he has stolen certain jewels. He further submitted that during investigation, the petitioner's husband was arrested and it was alleged that he gave a confession that he purchased the aforesaid motor vehicle by way of selling of the stolen gold jewels concerned in the above case. He further submitted that since the petitioner has purchased the said motor vehicle even in the year 2016 itself, the contention of the respondent that the petitioner's husband purchased the said vehicle only by selling of the stolen gold jewels which are involved in Crime No.43 of 2019 is totally false. Hence, the petitioner has filed an application before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Alandur seeking to return the said vehicle for interim custody. The learned Judicial Magistrate without the considering the aforesaid facts has dismissed the said petition and hence, he requests to set aside the said order and direct the concerned Judicial Magistrate to return the vehicle to the petitioner for interim custody.

(3.) Per Contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) who is appearing for the respondent has submitted that as per the confession given by the petitioner's husband, he purchased the aforesaid motorcycle only by selling the stolen gold jewels which are involved in the Crime No.43 of 2019. Taking into consideration of the said fact, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Alandur has rightly dismissed and in the said order this Court need not interfere and hence, he prayed to dismiss this petition.