IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the trial Court has the power to consider the application for interim custody of the vehicle under Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. in cases arising out of NDPS Act, based on settled principles established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., 1973, to call for the records and set aside the order of dismissal dated 18.10.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.2409 of 2023 in Crime No.584 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai by allowing the present Criminal Revision Petition.)

1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed to set aside the order dated 18.10.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.2409 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and to direct the respondent to grant interim custody of the vehicle Toyota Innova Car bearing Registration No.TN-22-CH-3280 which was seized by the respondent in Crime No.584 of 2023.

2. The brief facts of the case:

2.1. On 28.08.2023 at 15.00 hours while the respondent police was checking the vehicle near Pudurpandiyapuram Toll Plaza, Thoothukudi District, three vehicles bearing Registration Nos.TN 07 CK 2123, TN 22 CH 3280 Innova Car and TN 69 AM 9690 Bajaj Pulsar Bike were used by the accused for transporting Ganja. The case was registered in Crime No.584 of 2023 by the respondent police against 16 accused for the offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 29(1) of NDPS Act. Totally 228 kilograms of Ganja were recovered.

2.2. The petitioner's mother one Rani was the owner of the said vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 22 CH 3280 Toyota Innova Car. The mother of the petitioner died and the petitioner is one of the legal heirs of his mother and other legal heirs are ready to file affidavits for returning the vehicle to the petitioner. The vehicle was seized by the respondent police and the same is kept with the respondent police station in an open place thereby it will be ruined due to sunlight, rain, air and natural calamities. The petitioner's vehicle was not used for the alleged offence and false case has been registered against the petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court issued guidelines for returning seized properties in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai case reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283.

2.3. So the petitioner has filed the petition in Crl.M.P.No.2409 of 2023 before the Principal Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai for return of property. After hearing both, the petition was dismissed on 18.10.2023. Being aggrieved by the order, the revision petitioner preferred this Criminal Revision Case.

3. Heard both side and perused the records in this Criminal Revision Case.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has submitted that the trial Court failed to appreciate the provisions of Section 451 of Cr.P.C. The car in question was not used for any antisocial activities and was not carrying any drugs. The respondent police created a concocted story. The friends of the petitioner borrowed the vehicle for a common trip to Pondicherry. The vehicle TN 22 CH 3280 stood in the name of Rani, who died on 04.03.2021. The petitioner is the legal heir of his mother and other legal heirs are ready to file affidavits stating no objection. He has also produced a copy of legal heir certificate.

5. The trial Court has discussed the order of the High Court made in Crl.R.C(MD)No.41 of 2019 for return of property seized under NDPS Act, but dismissed the petition as the petitioner has not produced a legal heir certificate and also he has not furnished the details, when the vehicle was entrusted to whom. The petitioner has to be given an opportunity to produce a legal heir certificate. Mere retaining the vehicle would not serve any purpose and the same was deprecated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various cases.

6. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai case reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, whenever any vehicle is seized by the police it ought not to be retained in the custody of the Court or in the custody of the police for any longer than what is absolutely necessary. The trial Co