Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 160987 (MAD)

Velmurugan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

CRL RC(MD)/1318/2024 · 2025-01-28

P Vadamalai

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 10.12.2024 Pronounced on : 28.01.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 Velmurugan ... Petitioner Vs. State of Tamil Nadu The Inspector of Police, Woraiyur Police Station, Tiruchirappalli District. (In Crime No.314 of 2022) ... Respondent PRAYER : This Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 438 r/w 442 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tiruchirappalli in Cr.M.P.No.13325 of 2022, dated 18.08.2022 and set aside the same by allowing this revision petition. For Petitioner : Mr.V.S.Ariharasudhan For Respondent : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.side) 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 ORDER This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order, dated 18.08.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.13325 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tiruchirappalli and to set aside the same and to direct the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate to return the seized cellphone and cash to the revision petitioner on interim custody. 2.The brief facts of the case: On 02.04.2022 at about 10.45 a.m. the respondent police while on patrol duty, the revision petitioner was illegally selling lottery to someone and inspected. On physical verification of the petitioner found that he was in possession of cash of Rs.1,85,000/- and three mobile phones. On enquiry, it was alleged that the money was the illegal sale proceeds of lotteries and hence, the respondent police seized the amount of Rs.1,85,000/- and the cell phones. A case was registered in Crime No.314 of 2022 under Section 5 r/w 7(3) of the Lotteries Regulation Act, 1998, and the seized properties were remanded before the concerned Judicial Magistrate Court. The petitioner filed the petition in Crl.M.P.No.13325 of 2022 for return of cash Rs.1,85,000/- and cell phones before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tiruchirappalli. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 After hearing both sides, the said petition was dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tiruchirappalli by order, dated 18.08.2022. 3. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the revision petitioner has come forward with this present Criminal Revision Case. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent and perused the records in this Criminal Revision Case. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has submitted that the revision petitioner has been running a private finance company in the name of Sri Vekkaliamman Finance. On 31.03.2022, the petitioner has withdrawn a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- from the bank in the account of finance company and produced bank statement to substantiate the same. The respondent has been continuously threatening the petitioner from 2016 and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The properties were remanded before the trial court. Therefore, the interim custody of the above case properties may be granted to the petitioner. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 6. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has been involved in number of previous cases including in the nature of this case, he has not produced any bill to show the purchase of his cell phone. It is further submitted that the seized amount is the sale proceeds of illegal sale of lotteries and the cell phones were also produced by using the illegal sale proceeds of lotteries and filed list of previous cases. The properties are material evidences for the prosecution case and if they are returned, the petitioner will alienate them. So, the Criminal Revision Case may be dismissed. 7. On hearing both sides, it is clear that the cell phones and cash were seized upon the allegation of illegal sale of lotteries by the petitioner. The respondent has represented that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has been involved in 11 previous cases, out of which, 10 cases are of this nature of offence. The respondent filed the list of previous cases registered by the respondent police, as follows: 1. Cr.No.888/2016 U/s.109, 120(B) of IPC and 5, 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act @109 of IPC and 5, 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act. 2. Cr.No.919 of 2016 U/s.109, 120(B) of IPC and 5, 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act @109 of IPC and 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 5, 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act. 3. Cr.No.956 of 2016 U/s.109, 120(B) of IPC and 5,7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act @109 of IPC and 5, 7(3) of Lottery Regulation Act. 4. Cr.No.281 of 2017 U/s 107 of Cr.P.C. 5. Cr.No.1498 of 2017 U/s 5 r/w 7 (3) of the Lottery Regulation Act. 6. Cr.No.282 of 2018 U/s.5 r/w 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act. 7. Cr.No.133 of 2019 U/s.5 r/w 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act. 8. Cr.No.660 of 2021 U/s.420, 120(B), 109 IPC and 5 r/w 7(3) of the Lottery Regulation Act. 9. Cr.No.664 of 2021 U/s.5 r/w 7 (3) of the Lottery Regulation Act, 2002 and 420, 120(B), 109 IPC. 10. Cr.No.666 of 2021 U/s.5 r/w 7 (3) of the Lottery Regulation Act, 2002 and 420, 120(B), 109 IPC. 11. Cr.No.1002 of 2021 U/s.5 r/w 7 (3) of the Lottery Regulation Act and 420 and 120(B) of IPC. The petitioner has not raised any objection in respect of the aforesaid previous cases. Therefore, in view of the bad antecedent of the petitioner and also the prosecution alleged that the amount is the sale price of banned lotteries and the cell phones were also purchased by using sale proceeds of illegal sale of lotteries, this Court is not inclined to allow the petition. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 8. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. 28.01.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No VSD To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tiruchirappalli 2.The Inspector of Police, Woraiyur Police Station, Tiruchirappalli District. (In Crime No.314 of 2022) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 P.VADAMALAI, J. VSD Pre - Delivery Order made in Crl.R.C(MD)No.1318 of 2024 28.01.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis