Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Ragini @ Aruna – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and proof of involvement. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 2. exclusive jurisdiction of special courts for custody issues. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. principles governing natural justice and custody rights. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
ORDER :
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
Heard Mr.R.Jothiraj, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner and Mr.C.Arulvadivel @ Sekar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for Respondent.
2. Present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order passed by Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, in Crl.M.P.No.2991 of 2025 by an order dated 06.08.2025, whereby the petition filed under Sections 497 and 503(2) of BNSS for interim custody of vehicle bearing Reg.No.TS.33-H-0549, was rejected.
3. Mr.R.Jothiraj, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner would submit that petitioner claims to be the owner of the vehicle, viz., White Colour Suzuki Brezza Car bearing Registration No.TS.33-H-0549. The said vehicle was seized by the Respondent and a case was registered in NCB.F.No.48/01/07/2025/NCB-MDS, for the offence under Sections 8(c)r/w 20(b)(ii)(c), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act, alleging that the said vehicle was involved in tr
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.
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.
Car owners, not charged in drug cases, may have vehicles returned unless shown knowledge or involvement in crimes.
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.
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 owner of a vehicle seized in connection with an NDPS offence can claim its release if proved unconnected with the crime, emphasizing the need for judicial scrutiny in such cases.
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.
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.
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
