IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, SATHISH NINAN, SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.
Pradeep B. – Appellant
Versus
The District Drug Disposal Committee - Respondent
WA No. 1304 of 2022
Decided on : 01-03-2024
Section 457 - Jurisdictional Special Court - Code of Criminal Procedure - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - 52A, 60, 63 - The court discussed the applicability of Section 457 of the Cr.PC for ordering interim custody of a vehicle seized under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. It highlighted the provisions of Section 52A, 60, and 63 of the Act, and their implications on the power of the Special Court to order interim custody of the vehicle.
Fact of the Case:
The court addressed the question of whether the jurisdictional special court can exercise powers under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to order interim custody of a vehicle seized under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the jurisdictional Special Court under the Act has the power to consider the grant of interim custody of vehicles seized under the Act by invoking the powers under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was whether the introduction of Section 52A in the Act denuded the Special Court of its power to order interim custody of the vehicle under Section 457 of the Cr.PC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of Section 52A, 60, and 63 of the Act, as well as the applicability of Section 457 of the Cr.PC to the proceedings before the Special Court, to reach its decision.
Final Decision: The court answered the reference by holding that the jurisdictional Special Court under the Act has the power to consider the grant of interim custody of vehicles seized under the Act by invoking the powers under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C.
ORDER :
SATHISH NINAN, J
Whether the jurisdictional special court can exercise powers under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred to as “Cr.PC”) to order interim custody of a vehicle seized under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), is the short question posed in this reference.
2. In Shajahan v. Inspector of Excise and Others 2019 (5) KHC 401, a Division Bench of this Court had answered the above in the negative. Taking note of the contrary view taken by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in a reference order, another Division Bench of this Court was of the opinion that the issue needs a re-look.
3. We have heard Sri.Suresh Kumar Kodoth, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.K.P.Harish, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondent.
4. Section 52A of the Act deals with “disposal of drugs, substances and conveyances” seized in relation to commission of an offence under the Act. Section 52A was inserted by Act 2 of 1989 with effect from 29.05.1989. Section 52A(1) was substituted by Act 16 of 2014 with effect from 01.05.2014. As per the substituted provision, the Central Government was required to notify the officer who is to be vested with the powers with regard to disposal of the seized articles. Section 52A includes conveyances along with drugs and other psychotropic substances. Section 2(viii) of the Act defines “conveyance” to include any vehicle. Therefore, the applicability of Section 52A of the Act to vehicles seized in relation to an offence under the Act cannot be disputed.
5. Prior to the introduction of Section 52A as amended in 2014, the power of the Special Court to grant interim custody of the vehicle was not in issue. Whether the introduction of Section 52A in the Act denuded the Special Court of its power to order interim custody of the vehicle under Section 457 of the Cr.PC, is the question. In Shajahan’s case(supra), the Division Bench was of the view that, it did.
6. Section 52A of the Act reads thus:-
(2) Where any narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, controlled substances or conveyances has been seized and forwarded to the officer-in-charge of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered under section 53, the officer referred to in sub-section (1) shall prepare an inventory of such narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, controlled substances or conveyances containing such details relating to their description, quality, quantity, mode of packing, marks, numbers or such other identifying particulars of the narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, controlled substances or conveyances or the packing in which they are packed, country of origin and other particulars as the officer referred to in sub-section (1) may consider relevant to the identity of the narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, controlled substances or conveyances in any proceedings under this Act and make an application, to any Magistrate for the purpose of-
(a) certifying the correctness of the inventory so prepared; or
(b) taking, in the presence of such Magistrate, photographs of such drugs, substances or conveyances and certifying such
Shajahan v. Inspector of Excise and Others 2019 (5) KHC 401
Sainaba v. State of Kerala 2022 (7) KHC 273
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat (AIR 2003 SC 638)
Point of Law : Section 27 extracted is Punishment for consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the trial court has the discretion to grant interim custody of a vehicle seized under the NDPS Act under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C., and there....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to decide the claim of a person regarding a seized conveyance lies with the special court under Section 60 and 63 of the NDPS Act, a....
The court ruled that provisions for interim custody under CrPC Sections 451 and 457 apply, despite NDPS Act confiscation risk, allowing for interim release of vehicles involved in drug-related offenc....
Car owners, not charged in drug cases, may have vehicles returned unless shown knowledge or involvement in crimes.
A true vehicle owner not implicated in a narcotics crime is entitled to interim custody of their vehicle pending trial, emphasizing procedural fairness and rights under statutory law.
Ownership rights must be acknowledged in interim custody claims of seized vehicles under the NDPS Act, especially when no charges are laid against the owner.
Release of vehicle - In the absence of procedure evolved for release of vehicle also, the matter has to be considered by the Larger Bench. In the case on hand, the question involved is in respect of ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.