IMPORTANT POINT
A registered owner of a vehicle seized in connection with a narcotics offence, who is not an accused, is entitled to interim custody of the vehicle, subject to meeting certain conditions to ensure compliance during trial.

JUDGMENT :

JITENDRA KUMAR, J.

Introduction

1. The present Criminal Revision petition has been preferred by the Petitioner against the impugned order dated 03.09.2021 passed by the Court of learned V^th Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur, in N.DP.S. Case No. 117 of 2020, whereby learned Court below has rejected the application of the petitioner for releasing the motor car bearing Registration No. BR06BR-4759, Chesis No.MA3CZF63 SJG 388620, Engine No. K12MN223620, which has been seized by the police in connection with Gaighat (Benibad O.P) P.S. Case No. 375 of 2020, registered on for offence punishable under Section 399 , 402, 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act and Sections 20/22 of N.D.P.S. Act against six named accused persons but not against this Petitioner.

Factual Background

2. As per the prosecution case, the vehicle in question was searched by the police on suspicion and 5 kg ganja was recovered from the dicky kept in a plastic wrapper. Besides the contraband, one country-made pistol and some cartridges were also recovered from the occupants of the car.

3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. He is, undisputedly, the registered owner of the car and he is no way involved in the commission of the alleged offence, and hence, the Petitioner is not even made accused in the case by the police. He further submits that the car is a transport vehicle used for commercial purpose and he has entrusted the vehicle to one driver for running the vehicle on hire. Hence, he is not aware of the commission of any offence by the driver or any passenger. He also submits that even as per the report received by the Court below from the Transport Authority, he is registered owner of the vehicle and he is entitled to get interim custody during the pendency of the Trial, which is at the stage of prosecution evidence. He also submits that no cogent reason has been given by the Court below for rejecting his application for release of the vehicle to his interim custody.

Submissions on behalf of the State

5. However, learned APP for the State defends the impugned order, submitting that there is no illegality or infirmity in it and the vehicle has been used in commission of serious offence of carrying contraband.

Consideration

6. I considered the rival submissions advanced by both the parties and perused the relevant material on record.

7. Before I proceed, it would be desirable to discuss the relevant law regarding seizure, confiscation and disposal of the vehicle involved in the commission of the offence under NDPS Act and jurisdiction of the Special Court to release the vehicle to interim custody of the bona fide owner during trial or inquiry.

Seizure and Confiscation of Vehicles under the NDPS Act

8. Section 60 of the NDPS Act deals with liability of illicit drugs, substances, plants, articles and conveyances to confiscation. Sub-Section-3 of Section 60 provides that any animal or conveyance used in carrying any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or any article liable to confiscation under Sub-Section 1 or Sub-Section 2 shall be liable to confiscation unless the owner of the animal or conveyance proves that it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any and the person-in-charge of the animal or conveyance and that each of them ha