LAWS(ALL)-1997-5-130

RAM NARESH CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Decided On May 19, 1997
RAM NARESH CHAUDHARY Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed for quashing the orders dated 24-4-93 and 30-4-93 passed under Sections 68-E and 68-F of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by respondent No. 2. The controversy raised in the writ petitions is identical and therefore they are being disposed of by a common order. The writ petitions have been heard along with the records of Habeas Corpus Petition No. 12529 of 1993 and Habeas Corpus Petition No. 15948 of 1993.

(2.) Chapter V which deals with forfeiture of property derived from, or used in, illicit traffic was inserted by Act 2 of 1989 in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act with effect from 29-5-1989. Section 68-E provides for identifying illegally acquired property and Section 68-F provides for seizure or freezing of illegally acquired property. The material part of Section 68-A of the Act, which is relevant for the decision of the writ petitions, is reproduced below :

(3.) Section 68-B is the definition clause for the purposes of Chapter V-A. Sub-section (b) defines 'associate' and sub-section (i) defines 'relative'. In view of sub-section (1) of Section 68-A provisions of Chapter V-A are applicable to every person who is a 'relative' of a person in respect of whom an order of detention has been made under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act provided such order of detention has not been revoked on the report of the Advisory Board or such order of detention has not been set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction.