SARPUTEEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the dismissal of his property return petition in Cr.M.P.No.752 of 2015, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, the petitioner has come forward with this revision.

(2.) Earvadi Dharga Police registered a case in Crime No.122 of 2015. In this connection a TATA ACE TN 65 J 1816 has been seized by the police. The revision petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle. He filed Crl.M.P.No.752 of 2015 under Section 451 Cr.P.C. and sought for interim custody of the property.

(3.) learned Special Judge passed the impugned order which runs as under: ?The learned Special Public Prosecutor argued that if the vehicle is released on bond it will be used for the same offence and investigation is not yet completed and he raised strong objections. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is the law abiding citizen, he will obey all the conditions imposed by this court, if the vehicle is not maintained properly it will be damaged, hence he prays to return the vehicle. Considering the contentions raised by the Special Public Prosecutor, this petition is dismissed.?