DURAISAMY Vs. DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel on either side. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

(2.) The petitioner's grievance is that the petition mentioned vehicle was seized by the second respondent on the allegation that it was involved in illegal transportation of PDS rice. The petitioner seeks its release.

(3.) When the matter was taken up for admission, the learned Government Advocate submitted that already a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No.44 of 2020 on the file of the third respondent. I posed a specific question as to whether the vehicle has been produced before the Jurisdictional Court. The answer is in the negative. The case is still in the investigation. I am of the view that so long as the vehicle has not been produced before the Jurisdictional Court, the Writ Court will always have the power to direct for the release of the vehicle. The learned counsel for the petitioner affirms before this Court that the petitioner's vehicle was not involved in any previous incident of sand theft or illegal transportation of sand.