The interim custody of a vehicle seized under the N.D.P.S. Act cannot be denied solely due to the possibility of confiscation if the owner can prove non-involvement in the crime.

ORDER

1. The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C against the order dated 13.09.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases No.2, Chittorgarh in Criminal Case No. 209/2021 pertaining to FIR No. 135/2019 registered at Police Station Parsoli, District Chittorgarh for the offences under Sections 8/18 & 8/25 of the N.D.P.S. Act, whereby the prayer to release the seized vehicle on supurdaginama in favour of the petitioner, has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the registered owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No. RJ-09-SW-4855 seized in the FIR No. 135/2019 for the offences under Sections 8/18 & 8/25 of the N.D.P.S. Act. He further submits that learned trial Court grossly erred in rejecting the application seeking interim custody of the motorcycle on the ground that motorcycle is liable to be confiscated under the provisions of the 60 of the N.D.P.S Act.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record as well the order impugned.

4. Having heard the rival submissions and perusal of the record, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is well settled that the interim custody of the vehicle cannot be denied on the ground that there is provision of confiscation of the vehicle under Section 60 (3) of the N.D.P.S Act. Under this provision if the owner of the vehicle succeeds to prove that if it was not so used within the knowledge or with permission of the owner, the same may not be confiscated. Otherwise also there is no point in keeping the vehicle in the police station until completion of the trial. Motorcycle will remain of no use after lapse of considerable time which may be consumed for completion of trial.

5. In the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, the learned appellate Court held that vehicle should not be kept in the custody for an indefinite period.

6. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned Order dated 13.09.2021 passed by learned trial court in rejecting the application of the petitioner under Section 451 Cr.P.C is quashed and set aside and motorcycle bearing registration No. RJ-09-SW-4855 is ordered to be released on 'supurdagi' in favour of the petitioner till completion of the trial. Learned trial Court is directed to release the vehicle after perusing registered certificate on usual terms and conditions.

7. Copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court for necessary compliance.