Special Courts under NDPS Act can consider return of property petitions, affirming ownership rights if statutory conditions are met.

ORDER :

M.Nirmal Kumar, J.

Challenging the order of dismissal dated 27.05.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.2712 of 2024, passed by the learned Principal Special Judge under EC & NDPS Act, Chennai, the Revision Petitioner is before this Court with the present Revision.

2.Mr.M.Suresh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a vehicle financier. The 2^nd respondent is the owner of the Lorry, bearing Reg.No.TN-74-AB-6786, had approached and availed finance for the Lorry, which was earlier financed by M/s.Equitas Small Finance Bank Limited. Now, the Lorry seized by the respondent for transporting Ganja of commercial quantity. The petitioner as financier filed return of property petition, which was dismissed, against which the present Revision.

3. Mr.N.P.Kumar, the learned Special 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 Special Public Prosecutor relied on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Suresh Nanda Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (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 reported in (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 facilities for the exclusive storage of seized narcotic and psychotropic substances and conveyances, duly equipped with vaults and double-locking system to prevent theft, pilferage or replacement of the seized drugs. Further, the Apex Court given direction to constitute Drug Disposal Committee and disposal of seized drugs lying in the Police Malkhanas and other places used for storage of drugs and psychotropic substances.

4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor would further submit that this Court in Crl.R.C(MD)No.41 of 2019 in the case of Nahoorkani Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu on 16.06.2023 held that when the conveyance is seized under NDPS Act, the return of property does not arise as contemplated under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C., and it is liable to be confiscated under Section 63 of the NDPS Act in the light of special procedure under Section 52 -A of the Act. Any person claiming the