Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 69192 (MAD)

V.Prassanna Venkatesan v. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police

CRL RC/313/2026 · 2026-02-26

Sunder Mohan

Writ Petition (Criminal)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL RC No. 313 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL RC No. 313 of 2026 V.Prassanna Venkatesan S/o.Vamanan, No. C/F/1, Pavan Villa, Erikkarai Main Road, Singatathottam 2, Sithiraikgarai Street, Vandalur, Chennai - 600 048. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police SHO, CCB Tambaram Police Station, Tambaram. (CSR No. 319/2025) ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 & 442 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to the order passed by Judicial Magistrate II, Chengalpattu in Crl. M.P.No. 2803/2025 dt. 26.11.2025 and set aside the same and consequently direct the return of the cash amount to the petitioner. For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Arunkumar For Respondent(s): Mr.Hasan Mohamed Jinnah State Public Prosecutor Asst. By Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate(Criminal Side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 313 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER The Revision challenges the order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing the petitioner's claim for return of cash that was lost by him in an on- line fraud and seized by the respondent police during the course of investigation. 2.It is the case of the petitioner that he had suffered a total loss of Rs.38,00,000/- in an on-line fraud; that the respondent have frozen the account of an accused; that he had filed a petition before the learned Magistrate for return of cash seized in that account; and the learned Magistrate dismissed the said petition on the ground that the petitioner had failed to establish the nexus between the amounts frozen and the amounts that was transferred from his account. 3.This Court is of the view that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. However, it is seen that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a recent case in WP(Crl) No.3/2025 and WP(Crl) No.15/2026 had held that the investigating agencies and the Courts have to follow the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs for dealing with registration and investigation of cases of on-line fraud and cheating and also for disposal of property/money seized in such cases. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 313 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 4.Therefore, the matter is remanded back to the trial Court. The trial Court shall consider the request of the petitioner by following the SOP, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving notice to all the interested parties. 5.With the above observations, the Revision is disposed of. 26-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No TSG To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No-II, Chengalpet. 2.The Inspector of Police SHO, CCB Tambaram Police Station, Tambaram. (CSR No. 319/2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 313 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SUNDER MOHAN, J. TSG CRL RC No. 313 of 2026 26-02-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis