Allowed

Sk.Haibul v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 Jan 2020CRLREV/493/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Case No. 2 of 2018, the Court considered a prayer for interim release of a vehicle seized under the NDPS Act. The petitioner, the registered owner but not the accused, sought release under Section 457 Cr.P.C., which was initially refused. The revised order allows the release of the vehicle pending trial subject to conditions, distinguishing the interim stage from the stage of fin

What did the court decide?

The vehicle was released to the petitioner pending trial subject to conditions including furnishing security and producing the vehicle as and when called upon.

Sk.Haibul Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

CRLREV No.493 of 2019

¶2

20.01.2020 In the present revision, the order dated 18.05.2019 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Criminal Misc. Case No.02 of 2018 has been challenged wherein the prayer of the petitioner to release his vehicle under Sec.457 Cr.P.C. has been refused as involved in commission of offence under Sec.21(b) of the NDPS Act.

¶3

The facts reveal that on 25.12.2017, the S.I. of Excise, E.I. and E.B. Unit-1, Cuttack detected the vehicle, i.e., black colour Yamaha R-5 bearing Regd. No.OD-01-T-2760 transporting heroin weighing 130 gms by accused Sk. Sahid. As such, the contraband was seized along with the vehicle and the accused person was arrested. After the chargesheet was submitted for the aforesaid offence, a petition under Sec.457 of the Cr.P.C. was moved with a prayer to release the vehicle. This was rejected by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack. The present petitioner is the brother of the principal accused and he is the registered owner of the vehicle, who has been subsequently added as an accused in the case.

¶4

It is not disputed at the Bar that the present petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle and he is not the accused in the offence alleged under the NDPS Act.

¶5

The law has been settled on the point of interim release of the vehicle involved in the offences under the NDPS Act. This Court in the case of Kishore Kumar Choudhury vs.

¶6

¶7

State of Orissa, reported in (2017) 66 OCR 1124 held that, the conditions stipulated for not confiscating the vehicle after the end of trial as per Sec.60(3) of the NDPS Act, i.e., it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any and the person-in-charge of the vehicle and that each of them had taken all reasonable precautions against such use, is not applicable at the stage of consideration of interim release of the vehicle under Section 457 of Cr.P.C.

¶8

Further in the case of Basanta Kumar Behera vs. State of Orissa, reported in (2013) 54 OCR 876, this Court has observed that, in case property is not released and the trial continues for long time, its value gets diminished due to damage caused by exposure to sun and rain and in that event whether it is confiscated or not confiscated, nobody gains anything and, on the contrary, in the event of confiscation, the State would stand to lose and in the event of no confiscation, the owner will be the loser.

¶9

In the case at hand, the ownership of the petitioner of the vehicle is not disputed and it is also not disputed that he is not the accused in the alleged commission of offence under Sec.21(b) of the NDPS Act. On the other hand, it is the case of the petitioner that his brother without his knowledge had allegedly committed such offence, which he was not aware of. Thus applying the principle as decided in the aforesaid reported cases, I do not feel that the impugned order refusing to release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner

¶10

¶11

is justified, because retaining the vehicle till end of trial by exposing it to sun and rain will only result damage to the vehicle and depreciation of its value in use. As such, favouring release of the vehicle to the present petitioner, the same is directed to be released pending trial.

¶12

Accordingly, the vehicle, i.e., black colour Yamaha R-15 bearing Regd. No.OD-01-T-2760 be released in favour of the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(i) the petitioner shall produce the original registration certificate, insurance paper before the concerned police station which shall be verified properly and true attested copies thereof shall be retained by the investigating officer/IIC of the police station;

¶14

(ii) the petitioner shall furnish property security worth of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) for the vehicle;

¶15

(iii) the petitioner shall keep the vehicle insured at all times till the conclusion of the trial and produce the insurance certificate before the learned trial court as and when required;

¶16

(iv) the petitioner shall not change the colour or any part of the engine and chasis number of the vehicle;

¶17

(v) the petitioner shall furnish four photographs of the vehicle taken from different angles before taking delivery of the same;

¶18

(vi) the petitioner shall not transfer the ownership of the vehicle in favour of any other person;

¶19

(vii) the petitioner shall produce the vehicle before

¶20

¶21

the court as and when called upon;

¶22