SUDHARSAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the dismissal order passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, in Crl.M.P.No.106310 of 2023, dtd. 4/1/2024, the present Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking interim custody of the seized vehicle viz., Royal Engield Classic 350 bearing Registration No.TN 55 BC 2737, which is in the custody of the respondent/Inspector of Police, Ganesh Nagar Police Station, Pudukkottai District, in Crime No.140 of 2023 for the alleged offences punishable under Sec. 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii)(B) and 25 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the NDPS Act').

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN 55 BL 2737 and the vehicle has been seized in Crime No.140 of 2023 by the respondent/Inspector of Police, Ganesh Nagar Police Station, Pudukkottai District, for the alleged offences punishable under Sec. 8 (c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) and 25 of NDPS Act. The vehicle is in no way connected with the alleged crime as contended by the respondent Police and seeking interim custody, miscellaneous petition was filed before the trial Court and the trial Court dismissed the petition. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Revision Petition is filed.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that admittedly, the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and on the allegation that the vehicle was involved in trafficking contraband, the vehicle has been seized and kept in open space. The petitioner, being owner of the vehicle is in no way connected with the said trafficking and the accused in the present case borrowed the two wheeler from the petitioner and used the said two wheeler. Since the petitioner vehicle has been seized and he is no way connected with the crime, the vehicle if kept in open place, is prone to corrosion and deterioration by being in open atmosphere, thereby, the value of the vehicle would diminish over a period of time. Therefore, the petitioner filed petition under Sec. 451 Cr.P.C. for interim custody of the vehicle, pending trial, which was since dismissed, leading to the filing of the present Criminal Revision Petition. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to comply with any conditions imposed by this Court and, accordingly, prays for allowing the Criminal Revision Petition.