ORDER

I. Brief facts of the case

Criminal Revision Petition No.623/2020 is arising out of the order passed by the trial Court dated 14.1.2020 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 r/w Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for release of the vehicle belonging to him, which was seized for the offence punishable under the provisions of Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act' for short). The learned Single Judge of this Court by the order dated 12.11.2020, has allowed the Criminal Revision Petition and set aside the order dated 14.1.2020 and directed the trial Court to release the seized vehicle to the interim custody of the petitioner on obtaining indemnity bond and two sureties and in accordance with law.

2. Subsequently another learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Zubaida -vs- State of Intelligence Officer, NCB in Criminal Petition No.4792/2020 by the order dated 24.11.2020 has taken a different view holding that in view of the amended provisions of 52A of the NDPS Act, The Magistrate or Special Court has no jurisdiction to consider an application under Section 451, 452 or 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for granting interim custody or otherwise of the seized article to an applicant when such seizure has been made under the provisions of the NDPS Act and it is the duty of the DDC, which is the authority to grant interim custody of the seized vehicle, in view of the dictum of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India -vs- Mohanlal and another reported in (2016) 3 SCC 379.

3. In view of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Zubaida's case (supra), the learned HCGP filed I.A. No. 1/2020 in Crl.RP No.623/2020 under the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to recall the order dated 12.11.2020, on the ground that the provisions of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and the notification issued by the Central Government in January 2015 empower the Drug Disposal Committee ('DDC' for short) to dispose off seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and conveyances under the NDPS Act. The learned Single Judge while rejecting the said application for recalling, has observed that Clause (2) of pargraph-4 of the notification issued by the Central Government runs counter to Sections 60 and 63 of the NDPS Act and further having regard to the provisions of the NDPS Act, the DDC has no independent power to entertain any application for release of the seized vehicle to the interim custody nor has it been entrusted with the jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim of the owner for release of the vehicle either under Section 52A of the NDPS Act or under the notification issued by the Central Government and these questions have to be decided by the Larger Bench.

4. In view of the conflicting orders by two learned Judges of this Court, the Hon'ble Chief Justice by a special order dated 13.1.2020, has referred this matter along with connected cases to this Bench for adjudication of the reference.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

II. Arguments advanced by Sri Sandesh J. Chouta, learned senior counsel for Sri Sunil, Kumar.S, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P No.9778/2021

6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contended that Criminal Petition No.9778/2021 is arising out of the order dated 5.5.2021 passed by the trial Court and by the impugned order, the trial Court relying upon the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Zubaida's case (supra), has rejected the application filed under Section 451 r/w 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for release of interim custody of the vehicle to the lawful owner and the same is erroneous and contrary to the material on record and cannot be sustained. He would further contend that from the date of seizure, vehicle has been in custody of the Police and the vehicle is parked outside the Police Station, which is gett