FINAL ORDER

15.01.2024 Present Appeal is filed by Appellant against the order dated 01.07.2019 passed by Respondent No.1/Competent Authority under Section 68-F(2) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, vide which the freezing order No. Fin. Inv.06 (B)/2015 dated 26.09/2015 was re-confirmed qua the three properties of the Appellant mentioned below :-

2. As per the fact of the case 30Kg 450gms of ganja was recovered from Tata Magic Vehicle Registration No. OR-02-BZ-9906 at Dadki Chhak, which was being taken from Jamujori to Phulbani Town at the instance of Raj Kumar Chaudhari in the jurisdiction of PS Sadar, District Kandalmal Odisha. FIR No.

68 was accordingly registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) & 29 of NDPS Act at PS Sadar Phulbani. Raj Kumar Chaudhari was also involved in another case FIR No.1 dated 04.01.2013 under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act at PS Sadar Phulbani Kandhamal. As accused Raj Kumar Chaudhari was the person covered under Section 68-A (2)(d) of the NDPS Act, 1985, Respondent No.2 Deputy Superintend of Police conducted the financial investigation into the illegally acquired properties of the affected persons as defined under Section 68-B(g) of the NDPS Act and passed freezing order No. Fin. Inv. 06 (B)/2015 dated 26.09.2015 and freezed the aforementioned three properties, which were confirmed by Respondent No.l Competent Authority vide order F. No. CA/Kol/ OR-C-8/2015-16/1053-1057 dated 20/10/2015. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Appellant previously filed appeal FPA No. ND-46/KOL/2015. The said previous appeal was disposed of by this Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 08.02.2018 and thereby the previous impugned order dated 20.10.2015 was set aside and case was remanded back to the Competent Authority with direction to pass final order after giving opportunity to the Appellant to file reply within four weeks.

3. After issuing fresh notice to Appellant, the Competent Authority again passed the order vide F.No. CA/Kol/OR-C-8/2015-16/554 on 01.07.2019, thereby again passing the confirmation order. Aggrieved by this subsequent order, Appellant filed the present appeal.

4. During the arguments, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the impugned order dated 01.07.2019 passed by the Ld. Competent Authority confirming the seizing/freezing order dated 25.09.2015 needs to be set aside. In support of his contention, he pointed out that all the three moveable properties are in the name of Appellant and the said properties cannot be attached simply because Ms. Padmabati Digal happens to be the mother-in-law of accused Raj Kumar Chaudhari. The Previous confirmation order dated 20.10.2015 was set aside by this Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 08.02.2018 and the case was remanded back for passing fresh order, after giving notice to the Appellant. During the previous proceeding before this Appellate Tribunal, it was admitted by the Respondent that no notice under Section 68-H of NDPS Act was ever served upon the Appellant. As per the direction of this tribunal vide order dated 08.02.2018, notice dated 28.02.2018 was issued upon the Appellant. Appellant after obtaining the documents from the office of Respondent filed her reply on 05.04.2018 before Ld. Competent Authority. As per the records of Ld. Competent Authority the impugned order was passed on 01.07.2019 i.e. much beyond the period of 30 days as mandated in Sectio