Public Interest Litigation cannot proceed when initiated by a close relative of the convicted accused, deeming it as Private Interest Litigation.

G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) .

The present Public Interest Litigation as such, has been initiated on account of the communication dated 08.11.2024 received from Sanjay Kumar son of Kishan Chand, resident of Village Kungri PO Silbdhani Tehsil Padhar District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh.

2. The Coordinate Bench while going through the affidavit of the Superintendent of Police, Kangra, H.P., was not satisfied to the siezure as such of two other vehicles, which were not at the spot in the case FIR No.19/2023 dated 15.02.2023.

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

The vehicle as such at the spot was HP-37-A-5817, which is stated to have been Omni Van and the other two vehicles are Alto Car bearing Registration No. HP-76-4505 and Mahindra Pick-up bearing Registration No.HP-76-5697.

3. Resultantly, fresh affidavit, as such, has been filed by the Superintendent of Police, Kangra, detailing as such the history regarding FIR No.19/2023, whereby Ravi Kumar, son of Mela Ram has been involved in the recovery of contraband i.e. ‘Charas’ weighing 1.110 kg from the Omni Van. It is brought to our notice that the complainant, Sanjay Kumar is brother-in-law of Ravi Kumar, the sole accused who is son-in-law of Kishan Chand.

4. It is also a matter of record that in the said FIR, as such, Ravi Kumar had been convicted on 06.12.2024 by the Special Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala District (Himachal Pradesh) for a period of ten years on account of the conscious possession of the said contraband.

5. The affidavit further points out that during the course of the investigation, large sum of money transactions were shown in the bank account of family members, who are stated to be un-employed and having no source of income. It is in such circumstance, the justification has been done regarding the seizure of the other vehicles, while referring to the provisions of Section 68 of the NDPS Act. The factum that the father-in-law of Ravi Kumar the sole accused namely Kishan Chand is absconding and concealing himself has also been mentioned in the affidavit. The Superintendent of Police has also submitted that the proceeding has been done with only intent to curb the active drug mafia in the region and with sole purpose to nab the drug peddlers and the seizure is under the relevant provisions of the law and before the confirmation of seizure could be done, complainant Sanjay Kumar has preferred the present application before this Court.

6. Learned Amicus Curiae has tried to make out a case as such, in favour of the complainant while submitting that there has been an acquittal order in favour of Kishan Chand in Sessions Trial No.47/2017 on 21.11.2018 and similarly in the Sessions Trial No.87/2020, both Kishan Chand and Sanjay Kumar were also acquitted on 30.12.2023, by the Special Judge-

II Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh.

7. We have gone through the said judgment dated 30.12.2023 as such and we notice that the Alto Car bearing Registration No. HP-76-4505 was also involved in the said Sessions Trial.

8. We are of the considered opinion that by way of public interest litigation, the matter cannot be as such, proceeded ahead as apparently, the litigation has been initiated at the hands of one of the close relatives of the prime accused, who has been already convicted and thus it can be termed as Private Interest Litigation. Therefore, keeping in view the above facts, we deem it appropriate to close the proceedings in the present Public Interest Litigation. It is open to the aggrieved persons, as such to approach the relevant authorities for redressal of their grievances, if any, regarding the seizure of the said vehicles. 9. Accordingly, the present petition stands closed.