SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Chh) 243

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
GOUTAM BHADURI, J.
SHAMBHU KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2624 of 2018
Decided on : 06-03-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
R.K. Gomasta, Adv., Anant Bajpai, Adv.

Headnote:

NDPS Act - Section 20(b) (ii) (c) - liable to confiscation - Prosecution case a vehicle bearing was intercepted and from said vehicle cannabis was recovered – Subsequently it was found that the original registration number of vehicle was wherein by change of number the vehicle was used. Subsequently application was filed for custody of vehicle which was dismissed - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of vehicle and vehicle was looted on from Jharkhand for which a separate report was made, which would be evident from document which is placed on record - He further submits that the said vehicle was used in transportation of cannabis and the present petitioner was not aware of the fact that the vehicle was being used for such offence and no purpose would be served to keep the vehicle in open therefore vehicle may be released – Held, Conveyance used for carrying narcotic drugs shall be liable to confiscation and Section 63 of NDPS Act prescribes the procedure for confiscation - Reply of State would show that confiscation proceeding has not been commenced - Predominantly it is stated that since vehicle was used for transporting Cannabis therefore it should not be released. Sections 60 and 63 of NDPS Act reveals that there is no prohibition for handing over the interim custody of the vehicle used for transporting the contraband drugs - So for all practical purposes as would appear that the vehicle is lying at disposal of the authorities or at police station - Therefore if it is kept in police station it must be occupying space or is prone to cause natural decay and may loose its road worthiness when kept in stationery position- In context of subject matter the principle laid down in case of General Insurance Council and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others reported in which has earlier reiterated principle laid down in case - Petition is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

GOUTAM BHADURI, J.

1. Heard.

2. The present petition is against the order dated 30.10.2018 passed by the Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act) Dhamtari, District Dhamtari in Special Criminal Case No.85/2018, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for release of the vehicle under Section 20(b) (ii) (c) of the NDPS Act was dismissed.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 27.03.2018 a vehicle bearing No.J.H.10/B.G./3333 was intercepted and from the said vehicle 142 KG cannabis was recovered. Subsequently, it was found that the original registration number of the vehicle was B.R.01/C.Z./0021, wherein by change of number the vehicle was used. Subsequently, the application was filed for custody of the vehicle, which was dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and the vehicle was looted on 09.02.2018 from Jharkhand for which a separate report was made, which would be evident from the document which is placed on record. He further submits that the said vehicle was used in the transportation of the cannabis and the present petitioner was not aware of the fact that the vehicle was being used for such offence and no purpose would be served to keep the vehicle in the open, therefore, the vehicle may be released.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the petitioner.

6. Sections 60 and 63 of the NDPS Act reads as under:-

60. Liability of illicit drugs, substances, plants, articles and conveyances to confiscation-

(1) Whenever any offence punishable under this Act has been committed, the narcotic drug, psychotropic substance, controlled substance, opium poppy, coca plant, cannabis plant, materials, apparatus and utensils in respect of which or by means of which such offence has been committed, shall be liable to confiscation.

(2) Any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or controlled substances lawfully produced, imported inter-State, exported inter- State, imported into India, transported, manufactured, possessed, used, purchased or sold along with, or in addition to, any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or controlled substances which is liable to confiscation under sub-section (1) and the receptacles, packages and coverings in which any narcotic drug or psychotropic substances or controlled substances, materials, apparatus or utensils liable to confiscation under sub-section (1) is found, and the other contents, if any, of such receptacles or packages shall likewise be liable to confiscation. (3) Any animal or conveyance used in carrying any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or controlled 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 had taken all reasonable precautions against such use.

63. Procedure in making confiscations.-(1) In the trial of offence under this Act, whether the accused is convicted or acquitted or discharged, the court shall decide whether any article or thing seized under this Act is liable to confiscation under Section 60 or section 61 or section 62 and, if it decides that the article is so liable, it may order confiscation accordingly.

(2) Where any article or thing seized under this Act appears to be liable to confiscation under section 60 or section 61 or section 62, but the person who committed the offence in connection therewith is not known or cannot be found, the court may inquire into and decide such liability, and may order confiscation accordingly:

Provided that no order of confiscation of an article or thing shall be made until the expiry of one month from the date of seizure, or without hearing any person who may claim any right thereto and the evidence, if any, which he produces in respect of his claim:

Provide






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top