Allowed

Shailendra Singh@ Shailendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2022A482/4437/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an order rejecting the release of a vehicle seized under the NDPS Act, ordering its return on security and specific conditions pending trial.

What did the court decide?

Release of vehicle UP50-CT-8156 on sapurdari subject to preserving the car, not disposing of it, producing it in court, not using it for offences, and depositing market price if confiscated.

Shailendra Singh@ Shailendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4437 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shailendra Singh@ Shailendra Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Neeraj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 17.1.2022 passed by Special Judge, Gangster Act/ Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-II, Ghazipur in Criminal Case No.331 of 2021, (State Vs. Shailendra Singh) arising out of Case Crime No.601 of 2020, u/s 8/20 of NDPS Act, Police Station- Saidpur, District- Ghazipur, whereby the application filed by the application for releasing the vehicle No. UP50-CT-8156 has been rejected.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant was arrested by the police on 18.11.2020 in Case Crime No.601 of 2020 and he has already been enlarged on bail in the said case vide order dated 3.2.2021. At the time of arrest, his car no. UP50 CT 8156 was also confiscated by the authority which stands in an open space at the police station concerned.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that there is every likelihood that after a year and a half, his vehicle itself would have been damaged if kept in an open place. Much reliance has been placed upon the judgement of the Apex Court passed in CRM-M-46869-2019 decided on 13.2.2020 (Tej Singh Vs. State of Haryana) and the relevant sub-para-21 are reproduced hereunder:-

¶9

"21. In the above facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold that there is no provision under the NDPS Act debarring the release of the vehicle for interim custody. The provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C. which is found not inconsistent with the provisions of the NDPS Act is applicable to the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act as well. No differential treatment to the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act is contemplated either under the provisions of the NDPS Act or under the ratio laid down by the Court of law. In our considered view, the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case (supra) will apply to the vehicles seized under the NDPS Act as well. Any contrary view taken by the Courts of law would be against the interest of the owner of the vehicles, the public at large and the State."

¶10

On the other hand, Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11

In view of the above discussion, the present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. The car in dispute bearing registration No. UP50-CT-8156 is ordered to be released on sapurdari to its registered owner on furnishing sapurdginama to the satisfaction of the learned court below on the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) that he will preserve the said car in the same condition during the pendency of the trial;

¶13

(ii) that he will not dispose of the same during the pendency of the trial;

¶14

(iii) that he will produce the same in the trial Court as and when so ordered by the trial Court

¶15

(iv) that he will not use or allow any person to use the car in question for commission of any offence including offence under the NDPS Act, and

¶16

(v) that he will deposit the market price of the car in question as determinable under the Income Tax Rules in case of passing of order for its confiscation under Section 60 of the NDPS Act.

¶17

A copy of this order be sent to Special Judge, Gangster Act/ Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-II, Ghazipur for requisite compliance.

¶18

Order Date :- 15.9.2022 Siddhant

¶19

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.09.16 16:33:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailendra Singh@ Shailendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Singh@ Shailendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Geeta Rani and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aalim 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shaney Alam and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kallu Ya@ Sudhir Singh Yadavdav Vs State of U.P. and Another