JUDGMENT :

RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. The present appeal is filed under Section 454 of Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment dated 28.12.2021 passed by the Special Judge, Dhamtari (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act) No. 150/2018 wherein, the Special Court has acquitted the accused/appellant of the charge under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) of NDPS Act while directing to confiscate the vehicle, i.e. Tata Safari bearing Registration No. UP-85-BF-0022.

2. Facts of the case in brief are that on 29.09.2018, police officials of Police Station: Borai has seized total 32 Kg contraband Ganja from the possession of the appellant along with vehicle namely Tata Safari bearing Registration No. UP-85-BF-0022. On the basis of seized articles, offence under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) were registered against the present appellant. After considering the evidence and material available on record, the learned Special Court has acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) of NDPS Act, but directed to confiscate the said vehicle. Hence, the instant appeal is filed by the appellant for grant of interim custody of the vehicle.

3. During course of trial, co-accused Gaurav Kumar has died and case against him was closed, which was reflected from the order sheet dated 05.10.2021.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is the registered owner of the vehicle and the order passed by learned Trial Court directing confiscation of the vehicle is bad in law. Material witnesses were declared hostile and thus have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the appellant has been acquitted of the charge under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the NDPS Act, therefore, the order passed by the Trial Court regarding confiscation of the vehicle may be set aside and the appellant be granted interim custody of the vehicle. He placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283 and decision of coordinate Bench of this Court in Tikeshwar Singh vs. State of Chhattisgarh dated 11.12.2020 passed in Cr. M.P. No. 1374 of 2020.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that in view of the provisions contained in Section 60 of the NDPS Act, the vehicle in question is not liable to be given to the appellant.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the records with utmost circumspection.

7. Section 60 of the NDPS Act provides for confiscation of the vehicle seized in commission of the offence punishable under the provisions of the NDPS Act, which states 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 there receptacles, packages and coverings in which any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance [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-sectio