The NDPS Act permits the interim release of seized vehicles pending trial in the absence of specific restrictions, emphasizing judicial discretion and the implications of undue delay in FIR.

Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner for quashing the impugned order dated 11.03.2025 passed by learned In-charge Special Judge ( NDPS Act )/1st Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital in Vehicle Release Application No.16 of 2025, titled as “Sapna vs. State” and further to direct the learned In-charge Special Judge ( NDPS Act )/1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital to forthwith release the vehicle being Registration No. U.K.

06-B.G. 9617 in favour of the petitioner.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the Sub Inspector namely Sunil Dhanik got lodged an F.I.R on 23.12.2024 against Nempal Yadav and Digvijay Singh, being F.I.R No.383 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Section 8 /20/60 of NDPS Act , P.S. Ramnagar, District Nainital alleging therein that on 23.12.2024, the informant alongwith other police personnel was on routine duty for maintaining law and order when they checking the vehicle at Thari Gaon Halduwa then after some time a four wheeler vehicle Tata Tiago bearing No. U.K. 06-B.G. 9617, in which two persons were boarded and the police team indicated the persons to stop the vehicle and also told for searching of vehicle and in the tank of vehicle two plastic bags were found and then the police team interrogated the persons, who disclosed their name and told that they have carrying illegal contraband i.e. Ganja and at Pirumadara for the purpose of selling the same they cam over and thereafter with the help of electronic weighing machine the said contraband was found 17.14 kg (i.e. 10.05 kg from the possession of the present petitioner and 7.09 kg from the possession of the co-accused) and thereafter, accordingly, the petitioner and co-accused persons were arrested at about 04:05 hours and recovery memo was prepared at the spot and police has also seized the vehicle under Section 60 of NDPS Act .

3. The petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle Tata Tiago having registration no. U.K. 06-B.G. 9617 and said vehicle was duly registered in the name of the petitioner and accused person Digvijay who is the driver of the aforesaid vehicle for some work.

4. The falsity of the instant FIR is prove from the fact that the petitioner and co-accused were arrested by the police at about 04:05 hours, whereas the FIR in question has been lodged about 06:10 hours, this vital delay of about 2:05 hours in lodging of the FIR has not satisfactorily been explained by the prosecution, whereas the distance of police station from the place of incident is hardly 6 km, this clearly shows that the police has falsely implicated the present petitioner and co-accused in the instant case crime.

5. The bare reading of the FIR cum recovery memo also clearly reveals that the alleged contraband of Ganja is shown to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner is 10.05 kg, which is below the commercial quantity. The petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle, which was intercepted and seized in connection with the aforesaid crime registered against the petitioner under NDPS Act and is now in custody of police.

6. The accused in the aforesaid FIR, therefore, moved an application seeking his release on bail before the Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, which was granted, thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for release of the said vehicle, but learned court below vide order dated 11.03.2024 dismissed the said application of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is the sister of named accused person Digvijay Singh and it might have been possibility that Digvijay Singh has used the vehicle in commission of crime after taking consent from the petitioner, the vehicle ought to have been released in custody of its registered owner, therefore, the order