Back
2021 Supreme(Jhk) 1054
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.
Nazma Khatoon- Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Opposite Party
Cr.M.P. No. 758 of 2021
Decided On : 21-09-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. P.S. Dayal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl.P.P.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to interim custody of a seized vehicle under the NDPS Act, considering ownership and lack of knowledge about the illegal activity.
Headnote:
NDPS Act - Interim Custody - Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 20, 22, 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance (NDPS) Act - Sections 36-C and Section 60 of the NDPS Act as well as Sections 451 or 457(1) of the Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition to quash the order rejecting her application for interim custody of her seized vehicle, involved in a case related to transportation of Ganja. The petitioner claimed innocence and cited relevant case laws to support her plea.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the ownership of the vehicle, the petitioner's lack of knowledge about the transportation of Ganja, and relevant legal provisions. It referred to precedents and concluded that the petitioner was entitled to interim custody of the vehicle.
Issues: Ownership of the seized vehicle, petitioner's knowledge of the illegal activity, and the applicability of legal provisions for interim custody.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the petitioner's lack of knowledge about the illegal activity, ownership of the vehicle, and the interpretation of relevant legal provisions.
Final Decision: The court quashed the order rejecting the petitioner's application and allowed the release of the vehicle under specified terms and conditions.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. P.S. Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Spl. P.P. for the opposite party-State.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been taken through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard on merit.
3. The petitioner has filed this petition for quashing the order dated 18.02.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in Misc. Cr. Application No.12 of 2021 by which petitioner's application for grant of interim custody of her Toyota Innova vehicle bearing registration No. JH-05BG-8311 seized in connection with Chakradharpur P.S. Case No.81 of 2020, registered under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 20, 22, 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance (NDPS) Act has been rejected.
4. The case was registered on the basis of written report of Kumar Prabhat Ranjan, A.S.I., Chakradharpur Police Station stating therein that on 27.07.2020, informant along with patrolling party proceeded to Pawan Chowk, Chakradharpur started vehicle checking in light of declared Shahidi Diwas by Maoist at 03:10 A.M., where, they saw one vehicle was coming from Sonua More, which was parked near a Hero Honda Motorcycle Showroom, who after seeing the police checking party, switched off the head light. Thereafter, the informant proceeded towards the vehicle, then the driver and one another sitting inside the vehicle fled away taking the advantage of darkness. On search, informant has found that the two number plates bearing registration no. JH-05BG-8311 and OD02U-2481 were fixed over the vehicle at front and back side. The patrolling party tried to call persons, who were fleeing from the vehicle, but when they were not turn-up, enquiry of the vehicle was started and the Executive Magistrate was called for the purpose of search, thereafter, the C.O., Chakradharpur reached there and in presence of two witnesses, the said vehicle was inspected and found four packets of Ganja 48 Kg. each in packed condition were lying in the vehicle, a Samsung Mobile containing Airtel 4G SIM, two black colour clothes and Toyota Innova Vehicle were seized in presence of two witnesses and accordingly seizure list was prepared.
5. Mr. P.S. Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and she was not having any knowledge of transportation of 192 Kgs. Ganja in the said vehicle. He further submits that the driver was driving the vehicle and the petitioner was not travelling in the vehicle in question. He also submits that no purpose will be served if the vehicle in question is allowed to be destroyed in open. He relied upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Versus State of Gujarat , reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283 . He further relied upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur dated 11.12.2020 in the case of Tikeshwar Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh in Criminal Misc. Petition No.1374 of 2020 and submits that in that case, the vehicle was directed to be released.
6. Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the opposite party-State opposes the prayer for release of the vehicle and submits that the driver has confessed about seizure of Ganja. According to him, the petitioner was having knowledge of transportation. He further submits that Section 60(3) of the NDPS Act stipulates that the vehicle can be released only when the concerned person is able to prove that it was used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner. He also submits that the there was two different number plates in front and back of the vehicle, in question.
7. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle and the petitioner was not travelling in th
