SANJAI GANDHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ramanathapuram to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner under Sections 457 and 451 of Cr.P.C which was returned on 19.06.2020.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police herein suo motu registered a case on 01.05.2020 in Crime No.382 of 2020 as against this petitioner and one Kaleeswaran for the alleged offences under Sections 4(1)(a) , 4(1)(b) , 4(1)(f) , 4(1)(I) and 4(1) (1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act and Section 1 of the Transport Act. During the time of investigation, the vehicles viz., Maruthi Alto 800 bearing Registration No.TN65 AU 2283 and PULSAR 150 bearing Registration No.TN65 V 2580 were recovered by the respondent police. After recovery, the respondent police has not produced the said vehicles before the jurisdictional Magistrate and thereby, the petitioner has approached the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ramanathapuram which is having jurisdiction to entertain the petition. After receiving the petition, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ramanathapuram, returned the same after raising query as how the petition was maintainable, since the property recovered by the police was already confiscated to the State. In the said circumstances, appropriate direction is necessary to the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ramanathapuram for get back the vehicle from the custody of the police.

(3.) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor made a submission that according to Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937, the respondent police is having the power to confiscate the recovered property to the State. In the said circumstances, the only remedy available to the petitioner is to challenge the confiscation order passed by the Authorised Officer and not to filing the application before the Jurisdictional Magistrate for return of vehicle.