No Bar On Granting Interim Custody Of The Vehicle Seized For Commission Of Offence Under NDPS Act: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has said that merely on the ground that the vehicle is liable to confiscation under Section 60 of the NDPS Act, it cannot be held that once the vehicle is seized for the commission of offence under the NDPS Act, interim custody cannot be granted.

The Bench of Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal further observed that the NDPS Act does not contain any bar regarding the grant of interim custody as contained in Section 52C of the Indian Forest Act, 1927.

The case in brief

The petitioner before the Court is registered owner of Tata Tigor Car, which was found involved in the commission of offence punishable under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act. He filed an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for interim custody of the vehicle before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Morena which was rejected in June 2021.

Against this, the petitioner filed a revision before the 7th Additional Sessions Judge, which was also dismissed holding that since the vehicle in question is liable to be confiscated under Section 60 of the NDPS Act, therefore, it cannot be directed to be released on interim custody.

Therefore, he moved the High Court with his 482 Application assailing dismissal of his revision plea.

Court's order

At the outset, the Court noted that even though Section 60 of the NDPS Act provides for confiscation of vehicle seized in commission of the offence punishable under the Act, but it does not provide for confiscation of any vehicle (found in commission of an offence) immediately after its seizure.

"Confiscation is a separate procedure unconnected with conviction, acquittal, or discharge of the accused. It is only satisfaction of the court trying an offence under the Act, to decide as to whether the vehicle is liable to be confiscated or not. A detailed procedure for making confiscation under Section 60 of the NDPS Act has been provided in Section 63 of the NDPS Act," the Court further explained.

Against this backdrop, referring to the Section 451 of the Cr.P.C. [Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases], the Court noted that it is not inconsistent with any of the provisions including Sections 60(3) and 63 of the NDPS Act.

Therefore, the Court opined, in appropriate cases, order for release of conveyance used for carrying narcotic drugs pending conclusion of trial, can be made under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C.

"Since the provisions of the Cr.P.C. including Section 451/457 have been expressly made applicable by virtue of Section 36-C of the NDPS Act to the proceedings before the Special Court (NDPS) and there is no express bar contained in the NDPS Act for grant of interim custody as contained in Section 52C of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, as amended by the M.P. Amendment Act, 1983, therefore, merely on the ground that the vehicle is liable to confiscation under Section 60 of the NDPS Act, it cannot be held that once the vehicle is seized for commission of offence under the NDPS Act, interim custody cannot eb granted, as jurisdiction of criminal court has to be construed strictly unless expressly excluded," the Court further held as it set aside the lower court's order.

Lastly, allowing the 482 Application, the Court ordered that on furnishing personal bond of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lac Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount, the seized vehicle be handed over to the petitioner.

Case title - SURENDRA DHAKAD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 16

Click Here To Read/Download Order