IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that an acquitted individual has the right to reclaim their property, emphasizing the importance of timely applications under Section 452 of the CrPC.

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.

1. By filing this revisional application, the petitioner has challenged the propriety, legality and correctness of the impugned Order No. 2 dated 20th April, 2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Burdwan in Criminal Misc. Case No. 578 of 2021, thereby rejected the prayer of the petitioner for releasing of the seized vehicle being registration No. WB-52 AG-4147 involved in Special Case No. 34 of 2017 arising out of Nandan Ghat Police Station Case No. 180 of 2017 dated 15.07.2017 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. The essential facts of the instant case are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this instant case as under:

2a. The petitioner is an advocate by profession and in the year 2017, he purchased a vehicle, namely, Hyundai Xcent Car being registration No. WB – 52 AG-4147 financed by Axis Bank amounting to Rs. 5,95,796/- payable in 84 months equal instalments at the interest rate 9.50% in connection with the car loan account number AUR000502322954.

2b. It is the contention of the petitioner that the said car was seized by the police in connection with Nandan Ghat P.S. Case No. 180 of 2017 dated 15.07.2017 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and since then the said car is under the custody of the investigating agency.

2c. It is further contention that though the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he has no way connected with the aforesaid Nandan Ghat P.S. Case. However, his name was initially transpired in the First Information Report but after culmination of investigation, he was discharged from the said case on the basis of prayer made by the investigating officer before the learned Court below as no evidence found against the petitioner. However, his car is still in the custody of police as an alamat of this case.

2d. It is further case of the petitioner that the said proceeding has been finally disposed of on 23.12.2020 by the learned Special Judge, 3rd Court (NDPS) thereby acquitted the accused persons, namely, Sanjib Roy, Sukhdeb Das, Samir Saha and Pintu Mallik from the charge framed under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and the learned Court was pleased to pass the following order in respect of the seized vehicle of the petitioner as under:

“Since there is no prayer for release of the alleged seized vehicle during investigation or trial of this case the said vehicle is liable to be confiscated to the state but the same along with other seized alamats and the mat Exts be preserved till disposal of this case after trial of the absconding accused Bhagna @ Rajus Debnath @ Raju Das.”

2e. It is further contention of the petitioner that when he came to know about the final disposal of the case by way of acquittal of the accused persons, he preferred an application before the learned Trial Court praying for releasing of his vehicle under Section 452 of the CrPC but the learned Trial Court has rejected his prayer for return of his vehicle on 20.04.2021 vide Order No. 2 in Criminal Misc. Case No. 578 of 2021 only on the ground that the application u/s 452 of the CrPC filed by the petitioner made at belated stage. It has no merit to release of the said vehicle. Petitioner is owner of the offending vehicle. He made an application for releasing of his vehicle after knowing the final result of the case of acquittal. As such, the instant revisional application has come up before this Court with a prayer to set aside the impugned order and praying for releasing of the vehicle to the original owner i.e. petitioner herein.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

3. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an advocate by profession and he is the owner of the seized vehicle being registration No. WB – 52 AG- 4147. He had been falsely implicated into this case