The court may order the return of seized vehicles under NDPS Act if the owner proves no involvement in the offense, subject to specific legal conditions.

ORDER :

1. Challenging the order of dismissal, dated 23.01.2024, in C.M.P.No.9137 of 2023, in Crime No.453 of 2023, passed by the learned Principal Special Judge under EC & NDPS Act, Chennai, the Petitioner, who is the owner of the vehicle viz., Auto, bearing Reg.No.TN-19-AD-0545, is before this Court with the present Revision, for return of vehicle.

2. Mr.S.Sathish Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle viz., Auto, bearing Reg.No.TN-19-AD-0545 and he is not an accused. The Petitioner hired his vehicle to the Accused No.1 and from the earnings, he is sustaining himself. The vehicle was misused by the accused to transport the contraband. He further submitted that the vehicle is kept in open space exposing to vagaries of weather, further detention would make the vehicle unusable, rusted and it would become a scrap. The petitioner is ready to comply with any condition that this Court may impose while granting return of vehicle. He would further submit that due to detention of vehicle, he is unable to make any earnings, and his livelihood is greatly affected.

3. Mr.Hasan Mohammed Jinnah, the learned State Public Prosecutor would submit that on 09.08.2023 at about 15.00 Hrs, the Respondent Police received secret information about the illegal transportation of Narcotic substance. The Respondent Police along with his team rushed to the spot i.e., Vallam Village, Big Street, Chengalpattu. At that time, two unknown persons came in auto, bearing Reg.No.TN-19-AD-0545 in suspicious manner. When the vehicle was searched, from the vehicle 1.100 Kgs of Ganja found and seized. Thereafter, the accused and the seized articles were produced before the lower Court.

4. The learned State Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition submitting that return of property in the NDPS Act Cases cannot be entertained invoking Sections 457 and 451 of Cr.P.C., and it is liable for confiscation under Section 52 -A, 60, 61 and 63 of NDPS Act., unless the owner of the conveyance proves that the conveyance was used without his knowledge and connivance, he has taken all reasonable precaution against such use. In support of his contention, the learned State Public Prosecutor relied on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Suresh Nanda Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation , (2008) 3 SCC 674 to stress the point that, where there is a special Act dealing with subject, resort should be to that Act instead of general Act providing for the matter connected with the specific Act. He stressed his argument mainly on Union of India Vs. Mohanlal and Another , (2016) 3 SCC 379, wherein the Apex Court has given directions for storage, seizure and sampling, handling and disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. Considering the piquant situation in which accumulation of huge quantities of seized drugs and narcotics increased the chances of their pilferage for re-circulation in the market and also finding that despite Central Government Standing Order No.1/1989 and two subsequent Standing Orders, dated 10.05.2007 and 16.01.2015 giving directions, directing that no sooner seizure of any narcotic and psychotropic and controlled substances and conveyances is effected, the same shall be forwarded to the officer in-charge of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered under Section 53 of the Act and Section 52 -A(2) of the Act. The sampling shall be done under the supervision of the Magistrate and the Central and State Government and its agencies within six months from the date of the order take appropriate steps to set up storage