#BNSS Section 497

Karnataka High Court holds that failure to dispose of seized property within the 45-day timeline under BNSS Section 497 constitutes a violation of property rights, directing lower courts to strictly adhere to statutory timelines. The ruling underscores the judiciary's role in preventing undue deprivation of property and ensuring procedural compliance in criminal cases.

Madras High Court sets aside a Magistrate’s order denying interim custody of a seized auto-rickshaw, ruling that the owner is entitled to temporary possession unless the police demonstrates specific risks like evidence tampering or flight risk. The Court directed release subject to bond, documentation, and surrender of the vehicle upon trial, reinforcing procedural safeguards under BNSS Section 497.

Karnataka High Court reinforces judicial hierarchy by mandating Sessions Courts to follow High Court directives under BNSS Sections 497 and 503 for interim custody of seized property, setting aside an order denying release of silver articles and cash worth Rs. 17.4+ lakhs. The ruling underscores that lower courts cannot disregard binding superior court directions, ensuring procedural fairness in criminal proceedings.

Madurai High Court allows interim return of a seized sand transport vehicle to its owner, imposing stringent conditions-Rs. 50,000 deposit, Rs. 8 lakh bond, and monthly court production-to balance property rights with prevention of re-offending. The ruling sets a precedent for conditional custody under BNSS Section 497, emphasizing judicial discretion over rigid seizure policies.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that confiscation of vehicles during trial under MP Excise Act violates constitutional rights, directing release under BNSS provisions.