2024 Supreme(Online)(ATFP) 1355
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
Shri Dipak Kumar Sahu & Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The Competent Authority Kolkata – Respondent
FPA-ND-459 /KOL/2022
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI MP-ND-815/KOL/2022(E.H.)
FPA-ND-459 /KOL/2022 Shri Dipak Kumar Sahu & Ors. … Appellants Versus The Competent Authority, Kolkata … Respondent Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared For the Appellants : Dr. Janmejaya Ray, Adv.
Mr. Digant Kallol, Adv.
For the Respondents : Ms. Monika Sharma, Adv.
CORAM SHRI G.C. MISHRA : MEMBER SHRI BALESH KUMAR : MEMBER
FINAL ORDER
15 .05.2024 This is an Appeal preferred against the Order dated 04.01.2022 passed by The Ld. Competent Authority (Ld. CA) in the matter of F.No.CA/KOL/NDPS/S-37/2021-22/624 to 639 seeking following reliefs:
a. Direct to release the remaining seized articles as enumerated in Annexure-A b. Pass such order/further orders as may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.
2. FACTS IN BRIEF As it appears from the record that on 23.08.2021 at about 04:15 a.m. the officers of Chhendipada Police Station effected seizure of 70 Kg & 300 Gms of contraband Ganja from exclusive and conscious possession of the occupant/driver Gobinda Naik of Vehicle Swift Dzire VXI Car bearing Registration No.OD-02-DD-4258. On the basis of the above a PS Case No.390 dated 23.08.2021 u/s 20(b)(ii)(C) & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 was registered and Shri Govinda Naik was arrested. An FIR 23.08.2021 was lodged against Shri Govinda Naik and Shri Chittaranjan Sahu @ Pintu at Chhendipada Police Station. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, it was revealed that the seized contraband Ganja belongs to the accused Shri Chittaranjan Sahu @ Pintu s/o Late Bamdev Sahu R/o Village Sapoinali under Chhendipada PS jurisdiction District Angul, who was providing financial assistance to accused Govinda Naik for running the business. It was disclosed by Shri Naik that he procured Ganja from Boudh District for selling the same to one Pintu @ Chittaranjan Sahu of Village Sapoinali under Chhendipada PS. It is stated in the Impugned Order that apart from this criminal case there are several other criminal cases, which have been registered against Shri Chittranjan Sahu @ Pintu under NDPS Act, 1985 and Odisha Forest Act, 1980. Chart expressing the information of those cases are available at Page No.2 of the Impugned Order and that Shri Sahu is absconding for long to evade police arrest. The offence alleged is covered u/s 68A(2)(cc) of the NDPS Act. Other persons namely Smt. Tillotama Pradhan (W/o Shri Chittaranjan Sahu @ Pintu), Shri Dipak Kumar Sahu (Brother of Shri Chittaranjan Sahu @ Pintu), Sushree Subhalaxmi Sahu (D/o Shri Chittaranjan Sahu @ Pintu), Smt. Minati Sahu (Mother of Shri Chittaranjan Sahu @ Pintu) are Affected Persons. The financial investigation was carried out by the Investigation Officer which resulted in identifying many illegal properties of the aforenamed persons as reflected in Schedule A to C at Page Nos.4 & 5 of the Impugned Order. For the sake of convenience, the same are not being reproduced here. After the financial investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer, Freezing Order has been passed in respect of the properties as reflected at Page Nos.4 & 5 of the Impugned Order. The Freezing Order was sent to the Ld. CA within forty hours for confirmation.
3. It is also revealed from the record that the Ld. CA following the principles of natural justice afforded opportunity of being heard to the Appellants and after hearing partly confirmed the Freezing Order. It appears from the Impugned Order that the Ld. CA has taken into consideration the details of submission made by Dr. Janmejaya Ray, Advocate on behalf of the Affected Persons and also considered the rejoinder/para wise reply of the IIC, Investigating Officer. It also reflects from the Impugned Order that the matter was heard virtually (due to COVID) and also by way of personal hearing.
4. After considering the Freezing Order and the reasons recorded in support of the Freezing Order by the I