Pavithran vs Mandapam Police Station — 124/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497(2),503. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNRM050003332026

e-Filing Number

03-03-2026

Filing Number

322/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

124/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Rameswaram

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 05-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

31

Police Station

MANDAPAM P.S

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497(2),503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Pavithran

    Adv. GOPINATH S

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Mandapam Police Station

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Property OrderView PDF

    Summary The District Munsif Court granted interim custody of a seized Yamaha MT motorcycle (TN 65 AT 9875) to petitioner Pavithran, relying on the Supreme Court's *Sundarabai Ambalal Desai* precedent that seizure photographs are sufficient proof. The court imposed strict conditions: the petitioner must execute a bond of Rs. 60,000 with two sureties of Rs. 30,000 each, submit affidavits confirming non-alteration and non-commission of motor vehicle offences, and produce the vehicle at trial, despite police objections based on the accused's prior dangerous driving and stunt-posting behavior. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Enquiry

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 124/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The District Munsif Court granted interim custody of a seized Yamaha MT motorcycle (TN 65 AT 9875) to petitioner Pavithran, relying on the Supreme Court's *Sundarabai Ambalal Desai* precedent that seizure photographs are sufficient proof. The court imposed strict conditions: the petitioner must execute a bond of Rs. 60,000 with two sureties of Rs. 30,000 each, submit affidavits confirming non-alteration and non-commission of motor vehicle offences, and produce the vehicle at trial, despite police objections based on the accused's prior dangerous driving and stunt-posting behavior. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case