Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J
Pushpalatha – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By Inspector of Police, Karaikudi South Police Station, Sivagangai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. owner of a seized vehicle can claim custody if not implicated. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court discussions on conditions for interim release. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. supreme court precedent on jurisdiction for interim custody. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal rationale for the vehicle's release due to lack of owner involvement. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. final directives on vehicle release and conditions. (Para 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
Heard Mr.A.Balaji, learned Counsel Revision Petitioner and Mr.Vaikkam Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate for Respondent.
2. Present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order dated 07.10.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.2275 of 2025 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, whereby the petition under Section 497 and 503 of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., Yamaha R15S motorbike (Mat Black 2 Colour) bearing Registration No.TN-63-CU-2071 (Chassis No.ME1RG67M8R0026369, Engine No.G3N4E0796215, was rejected on the premise that the petition was not maintainable, having been filed at a premature stage, considering the gravity of the offence, the stage of investigation, and the fact that contraband was seized from the said vehicle.
3. Mr.A.Balaji,
Interim custody of property seized under drug law is granted to uncharged owners unless proven involved, affirming their rights within legal frameworks established.
A true vehicle owner not implicated in a narcotics crime is entitled to interim custody of their vehicle pending trial, emphasizing procedural fairness and rights under statutory law.
Car owners, not charged in drug cases, may have vehicles returned unless shown knowledge or involvement in crimes.
The court emphasized that the ownership of seized vehicles cannot be ignored and must be adjudicated by a Special Court to ensure fairness and justice.
Interim custody of a seized vehicle under NDPS is justified if the owner proves no knowledge or involvement in illegal acts, respecting natural justice.
The court reaffirmed that the jurisdiction to grant interim custody of vehicles seized under NDPS Act lies with the Special Court, ensuring owners' rights are protected during proceedings.
The Special Court has exclusive jurisdiction to grant interim custody of seized vehicles under the NDPS Act, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.
Ownership rights must be acknowledged in interim custody claims of seized vehicles under the NDPS Act, especially when no charges are laid against the owner.
The ownership of a vehicle seized under NDPS Act must be respected if the owner proves lack of knowledge of its illegal use; interim custody can be granted subject to conditions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
