The Special Court has exclusive jurisdiction to grant interim custody of seized vehicles under the NDPS Act, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.

ORDER :

Mohammed Shaffiq, J.

Heard Mr.K.Althaf Sheriff, learned Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates, for Revision Petitioner and Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate for Respondent.

2. Present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order dated 14.07.2025 made in Cr.M.P.No.1416 of 2025 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for E.C. And NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, whereby the petition under Section 497 and 503 of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle viz., Skoda Slavia car bearing Registration No.TN65BB0839 (Chasis No.MEXBPJPB5PG015653, Engine No.DTB168910), was rejected on the premise that case was only at the FIR stage and hence the petition was not maintainable, having been filed at a premature stage.

3. Mr.K.Althaf Sheriff, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner would submit that petitioner is owner of vehicle viz., Skoda Slavia car bearing Registration No.TN-65-BB-0839 (Chasis No.MEXBPJPB5PG015653, Engine No.DTB168910). The said vehicle was seized by Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.168 of 2025, dated 13.04.2025 for offence punishable under Section 8 (c), 20(b)(ii)(B) and 25 of NDPS Act, 1985, for illegal transportation of 1.250Kgs of Ganja. Petitioner has filed Crl.MP.No.1416 of 2025 before Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for E.C and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, to grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was dismissed by the Court below by the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 for the reasons stated supra. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed.

4. Learned Counsel for Petitioner would further submit that petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle and she would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In support thereof, she produced the copy of Registration Certificate of said vehicle and the same was perused by Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent, who confirmed that Registration Certification stands in the name of petitioner.

5. Learned Government Advocate would submit that the said vehicle may be released subject to conditions and in case, confiscation proceedings are being initiated, petitioner must co-operate and the same was agreed to by learned counsel for Revision Petitioner.

6. Before proceeding further, it may be relevant to refer to the order of this Court in Crl.R.C.(MD).Nos.646 of 2024 etc., batch dated 20.12.2024, wherein, it was held that with the introduction of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022, it was only the Drug Disposal Committee constituted under the said Rules, which would have exclusive jurisdiction to decide disposal of the properties seized under NDPS Act. That being the case, power/jurisdiction to decide the interim custody of the property including vehicles seized under the NDPS Act, must also vest exclusively with the Drug Disposal Committee.

7. A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court had however after referring to the following judgments, viz.,

(i) Judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Mohanlal and another reported in (2016) 3 SCC 379

(ii) Judgment of the Apex Court in Sainaba Vs. State of Kerala reported in 2022 (7) KHC 273

(iii) Judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Rathnamma Vs. State represented by PSI Channagiri Police Station Davanagere (Criminal Petition No.3571/2021);

(iv) Judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Shams Tavrej Vs. Union of India reported in 2023 SCC OnLine All 1154

(v) Judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Rajdhari