THANGAPPAN Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner / A.1 and the Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the Respondent.

(2.) The Petitioner / A.1 has preferred the present Criminal Revision Petition before this Court, as an aggrieved person, as against the Order dated 13.04.2016 in Crl.M.P.No.964 of 2016 passed by the Learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, (Allikulam Complex) Egmore, Chennai. The Learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore (Allikulam Complex) Chennai while passing the impugned order in Crl.M.P.No.964 of 2016 in Crime No.217 of 2016 (filed by the Petitioner / A.1) on 13.04.2016 had among other things observed that ....................it was informed that the case property was obtained by the accused through sale of lottery tickets unlawfully and in the confession when the lottery ticket was sold the cash in hand (Rs.43,676/ -) was admitted by the accused. The aforesaid confession its validity, genuineness can only be found out in the main case. However, in the seizure mahazar and in other documents, the amount was mentioned as obtained through lottery tickets and as such, presently whether the amount was recovered from the house of the Petitioner or whether it was obtained through sale of lottery tickets and at that time, the said amount was seized could not be found out and these aspects could only be found out / determined at the time of hearing of the main case etc., and resultantly dismissed the Petition.

(3.) The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner / A.1 projects an argument that the trial court had violated the ingredients of relevant provision of Criminal Procedure Code and passed a mechanical order in Crl.M.P.No.964 of 2016 (relating to return of property) and in fact, the Petitioner / A.1 is a small scale painting contractor and the seized sum of Rs.43,676/ - is equal to the total investment in the said business and the dismissal of the Petition in Crl.M.P.No.964 of 2016 had caused heavy hardship and loss to him.