BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 03.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

Latha ... Petitioner

Vs

The State of Tamil Nadu,

Rep by the Inspector of Police,

Koodal Pudur Police Station,

Madurai City.

Crime No. 534/2024. ... Respondent

Prayer: This Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS call for the records made in Crl.MP.No. 358/2025 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act Cases, Madurai filed by the petitioner U/s.497 r/w 503(2) of BNSS, for return of

vehicle and set aside the dismissal order dated 04.03.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Surliraja

For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabakar

Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

Heard Mr.P.Surliraja, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner and Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent.

2. This Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order of Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act Cases, Madurai, dated 04.03.2025 in Cr.M.P.No.358 of 2025 and to direct the lower Court to return the vehicle, viz., Himalaya Royal Enfield two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-03-S-9957, to Revision Petitioner.

3. Mr.P.Surliraja, learned Counsel for Revision Petitioner, would submit that petitioner is the owner of the vehicle viz., Himalaya Royal Enfield two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-03-S-9957. The said vehicle was seized by Respondent Police and a case was registered in Crime No.534 of 2024, dated 06.09.2024 for offence Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 and 29(1) of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for illegal transportation of 2.100 kg of ganja. The Petitioner has filed Crl.MP.No.358 of 2025 before the Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act Cases, Madurai, to grant interim custody of the said vehicle and the said petition was dismissed by the court below by the impugned order dated 04.03.2025. Challenging the same, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed. He would further submit that petitioner has not been arraigned as accused and has no knowledge of the alleged offence.

4. Learned Counsel for Petitioner would further submit that impugned order places reliance on the order of this Court in the case of Nahoorhani vs State in Crl.RC(MD).No.41 of 2019 dated 16.06.2023. The impugned order suffers from error apparent inasmuch as the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Nahoorhani's case relied by the court below, has been overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Denash Vs State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2025 Live Law (SC) 1032. He would further submit that petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle and that she would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent would submit that the said vehicle was involved in the serious offence of transporting ganja and therefore, this Court must exercise restraint while entertaining these petitions and the vehicle may be released subject to conditions. He would also submit that in case, confiscation proceedings are being initiated, petitioner must co-operate and the same was agreed to by learned counsel for Revision Petitioner.

6. Before proceeding further, it may be relevant to refer to the order of this Court in Crl.R.C.(MD).Nos.646 of 2024 etc., batch dated 20.12.2024, wherein, it was held that with the introduction of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022, it was only the Drug Disposal Committee constituted under the said Rules, which would have exclusive jurisdiction to decide disposal of the properties seized under NDPS Act. That being the case, power/jurisdiction to decide the interim custody of the property including vehicles seized under the NDPS Act, must also vest exclusively with the Drug Disposal Committee. 7. A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court had however