Justice B. Pugalendhi, Madras High Court, Madurai Bench
Systematic Lapses In Disposal Of Seized Conveyances & Contraband Under NDPS Act Remain A Recurring Concern: Madras High Court
|The Madras High Court said that the Trial Courts continue to mechanically invoke Sections 451 and 457 of CrPC, disregarding both NDPS Act and BNSS mandates.
The Madras High Court has remarked that systemic lapses in the disposal of seized conveyances and contraband under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) remain a recurring concern.
The Madurai Bench remarked thus in a Criminal Appeal filed against the Order of the Additional District Court by which the Application seeking release of the vehicle was dismissed.
A Single Bench of Justice B. Pugalendhi observed, “This Court finds it imperative to reiterate that systemic lapses in the disposal of seized conveyances and contraband under the NDPS Act remain a recurring concern. Long-term retention of such properties in godowns or open premises has often led to deterioration, theft, or unauthorised usage.”
The Bench said that the Trial Courts continue to mechanically invoke Sections 451 and 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), disregarding both the NDPS Act and BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) mandates and this practice is legally untenable and dilutes the objectives of special legislation.
Advocate M. Jegadeesh Pandian appeared for the Appellant while Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) T. Senthil Kumar appeared for the Respondent.
Case Background
A vehicle was seized during investigation in connection with a crime under the NDPS Act and was produced during trial as material evidence. The trial culminated in a Judgment of acquittal and in the said Judgment, the Trial Court did not issue any specific confiscation order under Section 60 of the NDPS Act. It observed that the vehicle may be released to the ‘rightful owner’ after expiry of the Appeal period or outcome of any Appeal filed by the State.
The Appellant, claiming ownership, sought return of the vehicle through an Application under Section 452(2) of CrPC, which was dismissed on the ground that the State had expressed intent to prefer an Appeal. Hence, the Appellant approached the High Court. It was contended that the trial having concluded in acquittal, and the Court having recorded that the vehicle may be released to the rightful owner after the expiry of Appeal time or disposal of Appeal, the vehicle cannot be retained indefinitely.
Court’s Observations
The High Court in the above context of the case, noted, “… the recently enacted Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, under Section 497, provides a clear framework for the disposal of seized property pending trial. … Section 497 BNSS read with Sections 498 to 505 BNSS now provides a comprehensive and time-bound mechanism that must supersede older practices under the CrPC.”
The Court reiterated that indiscriminate invocation of CrPC provisions for interim release undermines the statutory framework under the NDPS Act and Judicial Orders that bypass the NDPS Act and 2022 Rules not only defeat legislative intent but also embolden offenders to reclaim vehicles used in crimes.
“The disposal or release of a seized vehicle is a separate matter from the trial of the accused. Merely because a trial is pending does not prevent the Drug Disposal Committee from proceeding with disposal under the statute. Claimants must approach the competent authority under the NDPS Act and not seek relief through interim custody applications under CrPC”, it added.
The Court, therefore, directed that all Investigating Officers, Prosecuting Agencies, and Special Courts handling NDPS cases across the State shall strictly comply with the procedures under Section 52A of the NDPS Act and the NDPS (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022.
“Priority must be accorded to pre-trial disposal wherever permissible. Disposal shall be treated as an integral part of case processing, and not as a postscript. Special Courts shall actively monitor compliance and Drug Disposal Committees shall expeditiously process referred properties to prevent administrative delay and loss of evidentiary integrity”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the Appeal.
Cause Title- R. Manimaran v. State of Tamil Nadu (Case Number: Crl.A(MD)No.192 of 2024)