S.63 NDPS Act Does Not Bar Owner Of Seized Vehicle To Seek Interim Custody After Expiry Of 30 Days From Date Of Seizure: Tripura High Court

"The proviso of sub-section (2) of Section 63 of the NDPS Act is relevant to decide the issue raised by learned counsels appearing for the parties. A bare reading of the said proviso makes it aptly clear that an order of confiscation of an article or thing shall be made after expiry of one month from the date of seizure. In other words, an order of confiscation of any article or thing cannot be made by the court within one month from the date of seizure i.e. the court may pass an order of confiscation after expiry of one month. In the opinion of this court, the said proviso of sub-section (2) of Section 63 of the NDPS Act does not contemplate that the owner of the said vehicle cannot file an application for releasing his/her vehicle after expiry of one month."

The Special Court had cited the case of Kishan Singh Vrs. State of Tripura to refuse interim custody of vehicle to the Petitioner herein. In the said case, it was held that there is a right to the owner who claimed "within 30 days" from the day of seizure, his title over the vehicle to have interim custody of the said vehicle subject to the adequate security till completion of the trial.

The High Court noted that the Special Court had misconstrued the aforesaid precedent. It noted,

"What the court has meant to say, that, in case no owner comes forward to claim the ownership of the vehicle within 30 days, then, the court may pass an order directing the Drug Disposal Committee for disposal of the vehicle by sale. In no way it bars the owner to approach the court and file an application for releasing the vehicle after expiry of 30 days."

It held that owner of the vehicle may file an application for bail at any stage of the proceeding or even during the proceeding of confiscation. "Needless to say, to claim the release of vehicle under seizure, the owner of the vehicle must satisfy the necessary conditions as laid down in sub Section (3) of Section 60 of the NDPS Act," Court added.

The police had detained and seized Petitioner's TATA Ultra 1518 Truck and recovered huge quantity of contraband articles. Driver of the vehicle was arrested. A case was registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(c)/25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The owner of the vehicle filed an application before the Special Judge for releasing the vehicle on bail, but, after expiry of one month. Petitioner argued that Section 63 of the NDPS Act does not contemplate that an owner has to file an application for releasing his vehicle within a period of 30 days from the date of seizure.

The High Court was of view that till today no confiscation proceeding has been initiated, even after expiry of one month from the date of seizure. It held that law does not mandate that a court must make an order of confiscation after expiry of one month from the date of seizure. The law makers have used the word "may" in sub section (2) of Section 63 of the NDPS Act which means that court is not legally bound to pass an order of confiscation in all the cases as a matter of routine.

Accordingly, the Court directed to release the petitioner's vehicle and quashed Special Judge's order, subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs.ten lakh with two local sureties. The owner has been directed to keep the vehicle in good condition, to not transfer the vehicle, modify or change its nature and character till disposal of the case and to produce the vehicle as and when directed by the prosecution or by the court.

Case Title : Shri Bal Krishna Mishra v The State of Tripura

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment