Ramu vs The Inspector of Police, Pathirived P.S Advocate - APP — 105/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497,503. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 06th March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNTR360002502026

Case disposed

Filing Number

241/2026

Filing Date

25-02-2026

Registration No

105/2026

Registration Date

25-02-2026

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gummidipoondi

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Gummidipoondi

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497,503

Petitioner(s)

Ramu

Adv. T. Magendiran

Respondent(s)

The Inspector of Police, Pathirived P.S Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Gummidipoondi

06-03-2026

Disposed

04-03-2026

Orders

02-03-2026

Issue of Service

25-02-2026

Issue of Service

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
Copy of Order

Summary: The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gummidipoondi allowed the petitioner's petition and ordered return of stolen gold jewelry and silver ornaments seized by police to the petitioner as interim custody. The court, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, held that valuable articles should not remain in police custody for years during investigation, and the owner would suffer if not returned. The petitioner must execute a ₹50,000 bond with two sureties, not alter the property, provide photographs, and produce it in court as required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gummidipoondi allowed the petitioner's petition and ordered return of stolen gold jewelry and silver ornaments seized by police to the petitioner as interim custody. The court, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, held that valuable articles should not remain in police custody for years during investigation, and the owner would suffer if not returned. The petitioner must execute a ₹50,000 bond with two sureties, not alter the property, provide photographs, and produce it in court as required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gummidipoondi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case