SONIYA Vs. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed to call for the records and to set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madhuranthagam, Chengalpattu District made in CMP.No.78 of 2022 dtd. 1/3/2022 and to direct the Judicial Magistrate to return the Mahindra Bolero Car bearing Reg.No.TN-12-AQ-0670 seized by the respondent Police in Crime No.41 of 2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, PEW, Madhuranthagam, Chengalpattu District to the custody of the petitioner herein.

(2.) The petitioner is the owner of the Mahindra Bolero Car bearing Reg.No.TN-12-AQ-0670, which was intercepted by the respondent Police during road checkup on 7/2/2022. At that time, they found that one Ashok Kumar was transporting 30 180 ML bottles of liquor in the car. The Flying Squad deployed due to the Local Body election. During the road checkup, they found the abovesaid transportation of liquor. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged and registered a case in Crime No.41 of 2022 for offence under Sec. 4(1) (a) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act (Transporting). The vehicle was seized by the respondent Police. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition seeking return of property under Ss. 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C., in CMP.No.78 of 2022. The Lower Court by an order dtd. 1/3/2022 dismissed the same for the reason that already confiscation proceedings have been initiated by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, (PEW), Chengalpattu, dtd. 16/2/2022. In this regard, notice was issued and the same was received by the petitioner on 26/2/2022. Thereafter, the trial Court dismissed the petition for the reason that confiscation proceedings was already initiated, against which, the present Revision.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the petitioner is not an accused in Crime No.41 of 2022. The petitioner's relatives were travelling in the petitioner's vehicle to attend the marriage, at that time, the respondent Police intercepted the petitioner's vehicle, they found that Ashok Kumar was transporting the liquor bottles. Suppressing travel of the other co-passengers, petitioner's relatives were proceeding to attend a marriage, which was not recorded. Further, the respondent Police failed to produce the vehicle before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court, which is imperative. In the First Information Report, the reference to the vehicle and the liquor bottles are recorded. The respondent Police is duty bound to produce the vehicle before the concerned Magistrate, but they failed to do so and the Lower Court dismissed the petition for the reason confiscation proceeding initiated cannot be a reason for dismissing the petition citing the guidelines issued in the case of "David V. Shakthivel, Inspector of Police-cum-Station House Officer, dtd. 8/1/2010 in Contempt Petition No.1156 of 2020.