SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(P&H) 1857

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
M. JEYAPAUL & SNEH PRASHAR, JJ.
Gurbinder Singh @ Shinder - Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
CRR No.1765 of 2015
Decided On : 19-09-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. R.S. Randhawa, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

IMPORTANT POINT
Narcotics – Vehicle used for transporting the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances can also be released on sapurdari.

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.451 – Sapurdari – Release of Vehicle – Vehicle used for transporting the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances can also be released on sapurdari invoking the provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C. – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

       There is no provision under the NDPS Act debarring the release of the vehicle for interim custody – The provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C. which is found not inconsistent with the provisions of the NDPS Act is applicable to the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act as well – No differential treatment to the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act is contemplated either under the provisions of the NDPS Act or under the ratio laid down by the Court of law. (Paras 21 & 22)

JUDGMENT :

M. JEYAPAUL, J.

1. Petitioner Gurbinder Singh @ Shinder sought for release of Swift Dzire car bearing Engine No.D13A5100071 and Chassis No.MA3FSEB1S00478125 on sapurdari before the trial Court. The trial Court having made an observation that the car was used for carrying the contraband as per the averments found in the FIR and that the trial was yet to begin, chose to dismiss the petition filed by the petitioner praying for release of vehicle on sapurdari. Aggrieved by the rejection of the plea for release of the car on sapurdari, the present revision petition was preferred by the petitioner.

2. Learned Single Judge of this Court having heard the submissions made on either side passed an order as follows:-

“Learned counsel for the petitioner argued for release of vehicle in case FIR No.12/15 dated 16.01.2015 under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station B-Division, Amritsar and has cited judgments passed by this Court in Rajesh Kumar vs. State of Haryana, 2007(2) RCR (Criminal) 561, Iqbal Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2013(2) RCR (Criminal) 612 and Raghbir Singh alias Beera vs. State of Punjab, 2006 (4) RCR (Criminal) 343, in which the vehicles in the NDPS Act case have been ordered to be released on sapurdari.

This Court has already taken different view in CRR No.3231 of 2014 decided on 12.12.2014 titled as Kirandeep vs. State of Punjab, that the vehicle in NDPS Act case cannot be released on sapurdari. Therefore, there are different views of the Single Benches of this Court.

In view of the above position, the present case be put up before the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice for referring it to a larger Bench on the point 'whether vehicle used for transporting the narcotics etc. can be released on sapurdari or not'.

3. In the above background, the present revision petition has been referred to decide the point whether the vehicle used for transporting the narcotics could be released on sapurdari or not.

4. The brief facts of the case as described in the FIR are that 20 gms. of Heroine was recovered from the dashboard of Swift Dzire Car bearing Engine No.D13A5100071 and Chassis No.MA3FSEB1S00478125. The petitioner and one Sukhdev Singh were shown as accused. The Swift Dzire car was seized by the police.

5. It was contended by the petitioner that the Swift Dzire car seized by the police is lying parked in the police station. The condition of the vehicle is deteriorating day by day as it is kept parked in the open space. The further grievance of the petitioner is that despite “No Objection” expressed by the police, learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar chose to dismiss the plea for releasing the vehicle for interim custody.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the landmark judgement in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, 2003(1) RCR (Criminal) 380 and submitted that the Court has to invoke the provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for release of the vehicle, as otherwise, the vehicle parked in the open space will go waste. It is her further submission that the vehicle cannot be kept parked till the Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar reaches a conclusion in the trial after affording opportunity to the petitioner that the vehicle is liable to confiscation. Inasmuch as there is no specific bar under the NDPS Act, 1985, the provisions under Section 451 Cr.P.C. will have to be resorted to for releasing the vehicle for interim custody, it was contended.

7. Learned State counsel vehemently submitted that the vehicle seized under NDPS Act is liable to be confiscated. As observed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar the vehicle would be required for exhibition during the course of trial. At any rate, the respondent has no objection in releasing the vehicle for interim custody, it was submitted.

8. Let us first deal with the relevant provisions under the Cr.P.C. which have bearing on the issue involved. Sections 451 and 452 and 457 Cr.P.C. read as follows:-

“451. Orde










































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top