THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.14551 OF 2025

ORDER:

Heard Sri D.Bala Mallesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise. 2. Petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of the two wheeler i.e. Activa Honda, Model 2023, pearl precious white, with registration No.TS08 JZ 6097 (for short, ‘the subject vehicle’). In proof of the same, he has filed copy of Registration Certificate (RC). The said vehicle was seized in COR No.61 of 2024 by Respondent No.3. The said crime was registered for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with 20(b) (ii) (A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS Act’). The accused is friend of the petitioner. The allegation leveled against the accused in the said crime is that he has transported 620 grams of dry Ganja.

3. It is the specific contention of the petitioner herein that he has no knowledge of the said transportation of ganja. Accused is his friend, therefore, the petitioner gave his vehicle to the accused. The said vehicle is involved in the aforesaid crime. The vehicle is now in the custody of 3^rd respondent. If the said vehicle is exposed to Sun, rain and dust, it will get spoiled. He is a student. He uses the subject vehicle for part time job. The petition filed by the petitioner before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally at Hyderabad, for release of the subject vehicle, was returned on the point of jurisdiction. Therefore, he seeks to release the subject vehicle.

4. Whereas, learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, on instructions, would submit that 3^rd respondent has received vehicle from the learned Magistrate/designated Court only yesterday and he is going to submit the same before the Drug Disposal Committee. The Drug Disposal Committee has to pass orders in terms of Sections 52, 52(A) of NDPS Act. Thus, the subject vehicle was seized on

04.11.2024. Confiscation proceedings are pending.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the Circular No.13/SO/2019, dated 15.07.2019 issued by this Court.

6. The Apex Court in Union of India v. Mohanlal, 1. (2016) 3 SCC 379, held that necessary procedure prescribed in Section 52-A of the Act to be followed to release the vehicle for interim custody and laid down certain guidelines in paragraph No.20, which are as follows:

“20. To sum up we direct as under:

(1) No sooner the seizure of any Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and

Conveyances is effected, the same shall be forwarded to the officer in-charge of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered Under Section 53 of the Act. The officer concerned shall then approach the Magistrate with an application Under Section 52A(ii) of the Act, which shall be allowed by the Magistrate as soon as may be required Under Sub-Section 3 of Section 52A, as discussed by us in the body of this judgment under the heading 'seizure and sampling'. The sampling shall be done under the supervision of the magistrate as discussed in paras 13 and 14 of this order.

(2) The Central Government and its agencies and so also the State Governments shall within six months from today take appropriate steps to set up storage facilities for the exclusive storage of seized Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances duly equipped with vaults and double locking system to prevent theft, pilferage or replacement of the seized drugs. The Central Government and the State Governments shall also designate an officer each for their respective storage facility and provide for other steps, measures as stipulated in Standing Order No. 1/89 to ensure proper security against theft, pilferage or replacement of the seized drugs.

(3) The Central Government and the State Governments shall be free to set up a storage facility for each district in the States and depending upon the extent of seizure and store required, one storage