ORDER

Petitioner’s vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-57-H-4988 was seized by the Police alleging its involvement in an offence under Sections 22(c) and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ’NDPS Act’).

2. According to the prosecution, the first accused was in possession of 15.15 gms. of MDMA and he was found travelling in the aforementioned vehicle. He has subsequently been convicted by judgment dated 15.12.2022. The vehicle is now before the Drugs Disposal Committee constituted under Section 52(A) of the NDPS Act.

3. In the meantime, petitioner as the owner of the vehicle applied under Section 452 of Cr.P.C to get custody of the same. By the impugned order dated 15.11.2023, the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act and NDPS Act cases, Manjeri, dismissed the application, stating that the conveyance seized under the Act has to be disposed of in the manner provided under Section 52A(1) of the Act and that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to consider an application under Section 451 of Cr.P.C.

4. Sri. Gautham Krishna E.J, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the judgment of the Trial Court finding the accused guilty has not ordered confiscation of the vehicle and that the Drugs Disposal Committee has also not issued any orders regarding disposal of the vehicle. He further submitted that the vehicle was not used as a conveyance for transporting the contraband, which is the reason why the Trial Court did not pass orders directing confiscation of the vehicle. The learned counsel also submitted that as observed by this Court in Shanil v. State of Kerala [2023 (2) KLT 430], the pendency of proceedings before the Drugs Disposal Committee is not a restriction for the criminal courts to pass orders ordering release of the vehicle on interim custody or otherwise.

5. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

6. In the judgment in S.C. No.946/2021, produced as Annexure-B, the learned Sessions Judge had entered a finding that “on search of body of the person (A1) in the vehicle, a transparent ploythene cover having two other ploythene packets with white powder in crystal shape was found out from the right side pocket of his pants.” It is evident from the above observation that the vehicle was not used as a conveyance for carrying the contraband and it was only the person driving the vehicle who was carrying the contraband. Thus, the vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-57-H-4988 cannot be said to have been used as a conveyance for carrying any contraband as contemplated under Section 60 of the NDPS Act, in the Crime in S.C. No.946/2021 of Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act and NDPS Act cases, Manjeri. Hence, petitioner’s vehicle cannot be confiscated nor be dealt with by the Drugs Disposal Committee. Reference to the observations of this Court in Shanil v. State of Kerala (Supra) is also relevant in this context.

7. In view of the above, the impugned order issued by the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act and NDPS Act cases, Manjeri, is liable to be set aside. The Special Court shall pass appropriate orders releasing the vehicle to the petitioner as per Section 452 of Cr.P.C.

Crl.M.C. is allowed as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Jka/05.02.24 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 521/2024 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure A THE TRUE COPY OF THE RC OF THE MAHINDRA JEEP BEARING REGISTRATION NUMBER KL 57 H

4988.

Annexure B THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED

15.12.2022 IN SC 946/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT & NDPS ACT CASES, MANJERI.

Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2023 IN CRL.M.P. NO. 1572/2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT & NDPS ACT CASES, MANJERI.