Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Keeping Vehicle Idle in Open Space Will Diminish Its Nature and Lose Its Value: Madras High Court Orders Release of Seized Vehicle

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, led by the Honourable Mr. Justice M. Dhandapani, has directed the release of a vehicle seized in connection with a liquor transportation case. The Court, in its order dated 19th January 2024, emphasised the detrimental effects of keeping a seized vehicle idle in open space, stating that it “will diminish its nature and lose its value.”

The case, Crl.R.C.(MD)No.37 of 2024, was filed by one Muneeswari against the State represented by the Inspector of Police, Dhanuskodi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. The petitioner’s vehicle, a Honda Dio Motor Bike bearing registration No. TN 65 AR 3560, was seized following its alleged use in the illegal transportation of liquor bottles, an offence under Section 4(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act.

The petitioner had initially approached the Trial Court for interim custody of the vehicle, citing the ongoing financial obligations and potential damage to the vehicle if kept unused. However, this application was rejected, leading to the filing of the Criminal Revision Case in the High Court.

In the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel, Mr. P. Praveenkumar, argued that the vehicle was misused without the owner’s knowledge and pointed out the necessity to protect the vehicle from damage and fulfill financial commitments like EMI payments. The respondent, represented by Mr. A. Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the plea, noting that the vehicle was involved in ongoing confiscation proceedings.

Justice Dhandapani, in his judgment, referenced the decision of the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, underscoring the importance of protecting property rights. The Court ordered the vehicle’s release on several conditions, including the execution of a personal bond of Rs. 10,000, production of the vehicle when required by the court or police, and an undertaking that the vehicle will not be used for illegal activities in the future.

Dated: 19th January 2024

Muneeswari VS State

 

Latest Legal News