A.Revathy vs Inspector of Police — 19/2026

Case under Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 Section 21(1). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLR - Criminal Revision Petition

CNR: TNCB010012802026

e-Filing Number

12-02-2026

Filing Number

885/2026

Filing Date

13-Feb-2026

Registration No

19/2026

Registration Date

20-Feb-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Coimbatore

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 18-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 Section 21(1)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2)

Petitioner(s)

1.A.Revathy

Adv. Prabhu D

Respondent(s)

1.Inspector of Police

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
23-Mar-2026

Copy of OrderView PDF

Summary The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore allowed the Criminal Revision Petition and set aside the lower court's order, ordering return of the seized vehicle (Mini Lorry, Reg.No. TN 27 P 1558) to the petitioner as interim custody. The court reasoned that keeping the commercial vehicle idle indefinitely at the police station serves no purpose and causes depreciation, particularly following Supreme Court precedent that seized vehicles should not be retained for extended periods. The vehicle was released subject to stringent conditions including a ₹50,000 bond with sureties, photographic documentation, an undertaking not to alienate or alter it, and production before police/court as required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
23-Mar-2026

Disposed

Principal District Judge
11-Mar-2026

Orders

Principal District Judge
04-Mar-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
13-Feb-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 19/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore allowed the Criminal Revision Petition and set aside the lower court's order, ordering return of the seized vehicle (Mini Lorry, Reg.No. TN 27 P 1558) to the petitioner as interim custody. The court reasoned that keeping the commercial vehicle idle indefinitely at the police station serves no purpose and causes depreciation, particularly following Supreme Court precedent that seized vehicles should not be retained for extended periods. The vehicle was released subject to stringent conditions including a ₹50,000 bond with sureties, photographic documentation, an undertaking not to alienate or alter it, and production before police/court as required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.