IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.
Matloob Husain – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondents
Criminal Revision No. - 2136 of 2024
Decided on : 28-11-2024
JUDGMENT :
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J.
1. Instant Criminal Revision has been preferred against the order dated 10.4.2024 passed by Additional District and Session Judge, Court no. 6, Azamgarh in Criminal Misc. Case No. 01 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 161 of 2023, under section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Tarwan, District Azamgarh. By the impugned order trial court has dismissed the release application filed by the revisionist claiming himself as registered owner of truck bearing Registration No. U.P. 21-AN-5992. The said truck/ container has been seized by the police on 22.6.2023 under Section 8 /20 N.D.P.S. Act on charges of carrying illicit Ganja of 20 Kg 500 gram quantity. The revisionist was arrested by police from the truck and said contraband and Rs. 3,52,000/- Cash were recovered from his possession.
2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist has been falsely implicated in the case. He is registered owner of the truck and which is only source of livelihood of the revisionist. The revisionist has already been released on bail in Case Crime No.161 of 2023, under Section 8 /20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, Police Station Tarwa, District Azamgarh by this Court on 17.8.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34627 of 2023 whereby revisionist has been released on bail in said offence on the ground that procedure prescribed in the Rule 10(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 have been violated. The police has seized the truck of the revisionist and fraudulently framed case under Section 8 /20 NDPS Act. There is no report regarding initiation or pendency of proceedings under sections 60 and 63 NDPS with regard to said contraband. The vehicle of the revisionist has been wrongly seized by the trial court without assigning any cogent reason and by cryptic manner impugned order has been passed which is not sustainable under law. The revisionist has no criminal history to his credit prior to alleged incident.
4. It is further submitted that the vehicle was never used in transportation of illicit contraband under NDPS Act. The utility and serviceability of the vehicle is being rapidly deteriorated due to its parking at police station campus in unattended manner for such a long period and there is danger of its being rusted and inserviceable. He undertakes to maintain the character and colour of the vehicle if same is directed to be released in favour of the revisionist by the order of this Court. He undertakes to produce the vehicle on the direction of the Court on his own expenses. The revisionist has wrongly been made accused in the case and vehicle has been seized in violation of mandatory provisions of the act. The vehicle has not been confiscated as yet by the competent court in the NDPS, Act. Therefore, it is prayed that the vehicle may kindly be released in favour of the revisionist.
5. Lastly, in support of his contention, learned counsel for the revisionist placed reliance on judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 and a judgement of this Court passed in Matter Under Article 227 No. 3077 of 2023 ( Kanhaiya Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Another ).
6. Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for release of the vehicle and submitted that no illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the trial court, by which release application filed by the applicant has been dismissed. It is further submitted that revisionist was arrested from the spot and from his possession 20 kg 500 gram Ganja which is above the commercial quantity, has been recovered. The revisionist is registered owner of the alleged vehicle.
7. Section 20 NDPS Act provides punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis which reads as unde
Seized vehicles must be released to owners when there are no pending confiscation proceedings, emphasizing timely judicial action under the NDPS and Cr.P.C.
The Magistrate/Special Judge has the power to consider the application for interim custody of the vehicle under the provisions of Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C., and the Drug Disposal Committee does ....
The confiscation of a vehicle used in narcotics offenses under the N.D.P.S. Act can only occur post-trial conclusion, requiring the trial court to assess vehicle release applications on their merits.
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.
Confiscation of vehicles under the N.D.P.S. Act can only occur post-trial, and trial courts must evaluate release applications on their merits.
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.
A registered owner of a vehicle seized in connection with a narcotics offence, who is not an accused, is entitled to interim custody of the vehicle, subject to meeting certain conditions to ensure co....
The court ruled that a vehicle seized under the NDPS Act can be released on interim custody unless the owner is implicated in the unlawful use, affirming the application of Sections 451 and 457 of th....
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.