Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

Lalitha Jain vs State Represented By

Madras High Court|04 August, 2009

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petition has been filed by the power agent of the petitioner to set aside the order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore in Cr.R.P.No.19 of 2006 dated 24.05.2007 confirming the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Walajapet, Vellore District in Crl.M.P.No.1345 of 2006 dated 04.04.2006.
2. The petitioner's power agent contented that the petitioner financed the lorry bearing registration No. KA-01-D-3679 and the endorsement has also been made in the R.C. Book . One Sundar, s/o. Mani has approached the petitioner for finance to purchase the said lorry. The petitioner and the said Sundar entered into an agreement and the said lorry was purchased by the petitioner. The said lorry had already been financed by Sundaram Finance Ltd and the said loan was cleared by the petitioner. Further one Nalini also claims herself as the owner of the said lorry. But the lorry has been operated by the said Sundar. On one occasion, the lorry transported leather consignment and the owner of the consignment also travelled in the said lorry. To make wrongful gains, the owner was murdered by the said Sunder. Hence, a murder case was registered and the lorry was seized by the respondent police. Hence the petitioner filed the complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Walajapet, Vellore to release the lorry, but the petition was dismissed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1345 of 2006 dated 04.04.2006, and the reason considered by the learned Magistrate is that the lorry was used with 4 duplicate number plates and also involved in a murder case, further the said lorry is a necessary piece of evidence in the Criminal case. Aggrieved by the dismissal order of the learned Magistrate, the petitioner approached the Sessions Court, Vellore in Crl.R.P.No.19 of 2006. The learned Judge also dismissed the petition and confirmed the learned Magistrate's dismissal order. Aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner has approached this Court for release of the vehicle by setting aside the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judges.
3. After verifying the contentions of the petition and the prosecution and also after perusals of the orders of the Subordinate Courts and arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the State, the Court is of the view that there is a serious allegation that the lorry was operated with 4 duplicate number plates and transporting goods in an illegal manner and also involved in a murder case. All these were weighed by the learned Subordinate Courts Judges. In their orders, no irregularities were found.
4. Hence, the Court has come to a conclusion that the learned C.S.KARNAN, J skn/mra Subordinate Courts orders were perfectly correct. So, the Criminal Original Petition No.18625 of 2007 is dismissed.
04.08.2009 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No mra To
1. The Sub Inspector of Police, Sipcot Police Station, Vellore District.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras Crl.O.P.No.18625 of 2007
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Lalitha Jain vs State Represented By

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
04 August, 2009