VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Misc. Petition is directed against the order dated 14.3.2000 whereby the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. cases, Sri Ganganagar has refused to release the jeep bearing No. DL/1C/C-9402 on the ground that the same has been seized in connection with the offence under N.D.P.S. Act and is likely to be confiscated on the conclusion of the trial.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel that simply because vehicle has been seized in connection with the offence under the N.D.P.S. Act which is liable to be confiscated cannot be a ground for refusing to deliver for interim custody. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the court reported in 2000 Cr.L.J. 2079, Khema Vs. State of Rajasthan . This application is opposed by Shri Ramesh Purohit, learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) I have considered the rival contentions. It is not in dispute that the jeep in question has not been claimed by any other person. It is only after the trial of the case that confiscation order can be passed. Thus, in my view the order of the learned Special Judge denying the interim custody to the petitioner is not sustainable.