Back
PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Ajay @ Vikas – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
Praveer Bhatnagar, J.
By way of filing present criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has assailed the order dated 27.08.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu, whereby, the application for releasing the vehicle under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that confiscation proceedings cannot be initiated without waiting for the conclusion of the trial. It is argued that the learned trial court vide impugned order dated 27.08.2022 has dismissed the application for releasing the vehicle without initiating any confiscation proceedings. It is also argued that in the present case charge-sheet has already been filed against the accused and trial may take its own time to conclude, therefore, if the vehicle is not released its condition may deteriorate and its value would be reduced substantially as it is lying in an open place at the police station, therefore, revision petition may be allowed.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the revision petition. He argued that the accused was carrying opium containing weight of 130
The court ruled that vehicles involved in narcotics offenses should not be released during trial, emphasizing strict enforcement of confiscation provisions under the NDPS Act.
Confiscation of vehicles under the N.D.P.S. Act can only occur post-trial, and trial courts must evaluate release applications on their merits.
The court emphasized that an indefinite seizure of the vehicle would not serve any purpose and that the owner, who had not been implicated as an accused, should be allowed to reclaim the vehicle.
The confiscation of a vehicle used in narcotics offenses under the N.D.P.S. Act can only occur post-trial conclusion, requiring the trial court to assess vehicle release applications on their merits.
Seized vehicles must be released to owners when there are no pending confiscation proceedings, emphasizing timely judicial action under the NDPS and Cr.P.C.
The court emphasized the liability of vehicles used in carrying narcotic substances to confiscation, while also considering the owner's innocence and the practical implications of indefinite seizure.
THE COURT HAS THE DISCRETION TO GRANT INTERIM CUSTODY OF A VEHICLE SEIZED UNDER THE NDPS ACT DURING TRIAL, CONSIDERING THE EXCEPTION PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 60(3) OF THE ACT, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE RELE....
Confiscation of vehicles under the NDPS Act must follow the prescribed procedural safeguards; failure to provide a hearing renders the order illegal.
Once a matter is finally disposed of by a court, it cannot be reviewed unless the former order of final disposal is set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction in a manner prescribed by law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
