SATHIYAMOORTHY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 3411 of 2020 dated 07.09.2020, on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukottai.

(2.) The petitioner claims to be the owner of the unregistered Tractor and Trailor bearing chasis No.MBNAS48AVJTP34073 and Engine No.RJJ2KGA6832, seized by the respondent. The petitioner approached the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukottai, by filing a petition in Crl.M.P.No.3411 of 2020 for release of the vehicle and the learned Judge dismissed the petition on 07.09.2020. Against which, the petitioner is before this Court with this revision case.

(3.) On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that the lower Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce the document to prove the ownership of the vehicle. It is stated that the petitioner purchased the vehicle from the dealer but the vehicle was not registered, since the petitioner was waiting for the release of subsidy from the Government. It is further stated that even unregistered vehicle can be returned to the owner concerned. The learned counsel for the petitioner cited judgements passed by this Court in the case of Sathiyamoorthy v. The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining in W.P.(MD)No.8850 of 2020 and in the case of Kaliyaperumal v. State represented by the Inspector of Police in Crl.R.C.No.633 of 2020 and in the case of P.Rajinikanth v. The Revenue Divisional Officer in W.P.No.24085 of 2019 and prayed the vehicle to be returned to the petitioner.