Confiscation of vehicle under the NDPS Act requires adherence to procedural fairness, including providing notice and opportunity for hearing to claimants, regardless of their conviction status.

1.Heard Mr. A. H. Kapadia, Counsel for the petitioners; Mr. K. M. Babhulgaonkar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent No. 1 - State; and Mr. R. D. Mane, Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to this Writ Petition are that the petitioner No. 1 is Finance and Leasing Company engaged in the business of financing and purchase of motor vehicles. Petitioner No. 1 advanced a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the petitioner No. 2, on 15-4-1994, and further sum of Rs. 1,12,500/- to the petitioner No. 2 by way of hire - purchase agreement in favour of petitioner No. 2, for purchase of truck AP - 16 - V - 7794. Thus, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 both are the owners and the persons who claim right to the said truck.

3. On 2-8-1995, the Police of Nagar Taluka Police Station received information that Ganja was being transported by the said truck and the truck was parked in front of Driver Dhaba situated at Nagar - Jamkhed road at village Chinchodi Pati. On the basis of this information, the Police raided the spot in the presence of panchas. The truck was there. The three persons, Shaikh Barhanuddin Mohamad Jan Sharif, Krushna Brahman Shriniwas and Balu Laxman Kokate were also there who were engaged in unloading the bags of Ganja from the truck. All the three persons were stopped. A panchanama was prepared. Seven bags containing Ganja were found in the truck and 16 bags containing Ganja were unloaded and were kept in a room in Dhaba. After carrying out the procedure regarding search and seizure and after preparing panchanama, the truck, seized bags of Ganja and the three persons were taken to the Police Station and there Crime No. 100/95 for offence punishable under S.22, S.25, S.27 and S.29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "N.D.P.S. Act" for the purpose of brevity) and for offence punishable under S.66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act was registered. After completion of investigation, charge - sheet was submitted against the three accused before the Court of Session at Ahmednagar and Sessions Case No. 324/1995 was registered.

4. During the pendency of this Sessions Case, the present petitioners had filed application for giving the custody of the truck during the pendency of the trial. However, the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 19-10-1995, rejected that application.

5. The trial against the three accused proceeded and ended in conviction as per the judgment and order dated 19-6-1997 by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. In the said order, the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge passed the order regarding confiscation of the truck and further directed that the said truck be sold by public auction as per Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985, and the sale proceeds be credited to the State of Maharashtra. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, the three accused have filed Criminal Appeal Nos. 209/1997 and 219/1997, in this Court, and both the appeals are pending.

6. The petitioners have filed the writ petition on the following grounds :
The order regarding confiscation of the truck is passed without issuing any notice to the petitioners. They were not heard before passing the order regarding confiscation. Thus, the procedure as prescribed under S.63 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not at all followed by the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge. Not only that, even the principles of natural justice are not followed by the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge before passing the order of confiscation of truck. Thus, the learned