Ownership of a vehicle does not imply knowledge of its use for illegal activities; the NDPS Act allows for property return under specific conditions defined in the Criminal Procedure Code.

ORDER :

M.Nirmal Kumar, J.

Challenging the order of dismissal dated 12.06.2024 in C.M.P.No.5517 of 2024, passed by the learned Principal Special Judge for NDPS Act, Chennai, the petitioner, who is the owner of the vehicle viz.,Maruthi WaganR, bearing Reg.No.TN-01-BB-2440, is before this Court with the present Revision, for return of vehicle.

2. Mr.T.S.Sasikumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the proprietor of M/s.Anand Auto Corporation and he owns a Maruthi WaganR car. In this case, A2 was arrested from his residence and the car parking parked in terrace searched 5 grams of Cocaine seized and the vehicle seized. The petitioner has got nothing to do with the illegal act of the accused in this case. The petitioner is aged about 75 years doing automobile business. The petitioner to prove his ownership produced Registration Certificate of the Car, Insurance, Registration Certificate for his business and Aadhar Card and other documents. The trial Court dismissed the petition on the ground that A2 is the petitioner's brother, is not proper.

3. The learned counsel would submit that the petitioner is not an accused. Petitioner's son A1 said to have transported contraband of 20 Kgs of Ganja by using petitioner's vehicle. According to the petitioner, son using the father's car is common, but that does not lead the inference that the father has got knowledge of his son activities. According to the petitioner, even his son is falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner purchased the vehicle in the year 2014, availing financial assistance. The petitioner compelled to make monthly payment to the finance, failing which, vehicle would be seized by the financiers.

4. Mr.Hasan Mohammed Jinnah, the learned State Public Prosecutor would submit that on 10.06.2021 at about 22.00 Hrs, the respondent police received secret information about the accused persons dealing Cocaine and Ecstasy Pills Tablet. rushed to the spot ie., Old Jail Road, Pidariyar Kovil Street Junction along with his team and found Marti Suzuki Wagon-R Car, bearing Reg.No.TN-01-bb-2440, driven by one Mani. When the car was searched, from the Car, 20 grams of Cocaine seized. A1 was arrested and on his confession, contraband and vehicle were seized in Crime No.94/2023. On the confession of A1, A2 was enquired and from him 5 grams of Cocaine seized. Thereafter, the accused and the seized articles were produced before the lower Court and the same has been recorded vide A.No.1004 of 2023, dates 27.07.2023 and B.No.583 of 2023, dated 28.06.2023.

5. 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 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 narcot