1 - Rajeev Singh S/o Shri Hira Singh, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village v. 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:7861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 6 of 2025 1 - Rajeev Singh S/o Shri Hira Singh, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Salempur, P.S.- Sakaldiah, District Chandaeli (Uttar Pradesh) Present Address- Village- Chilkuti, Matagudipara Kurandi, P.S.- Nagarnar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant (s)
Legal Reasoning
: Shri Sajal Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For the State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 13/02/2025 1. The appellant has been preferred this instant appeal under Section 500 of the BNSS being aggrieved by the "para 75 which relates to confiscation of seized bullet motorcycle", of impugned judgment dated 13.11.2024 (Annexure A-1) in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act) No.37/2024 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Jagdalpur (C.G.), whereby the trial Court has acquitted the accused persons under Section 20(B)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 08.01.2024 the police of police station Nagarnaar, Jagadalpur received a secret information that two persons NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Digitally signed by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Date: 2025.03.07 10:27:18 +0530 2 are carrying Ganja in Car Tata Nano No. CG-04-HU-8550, and upon search, seized total 31.545 KG Ganja from their joint possession. On the basis of memorandum of both the accused persons one Baliram Naag was also searched and made co-accused. On the basis of Memorandum of Baliraj Naag, the police have seized the vehicle "Bullet-motorcycle having registration No. CG-17-KK-6021, Chasis No.ME3U3S5C1GA36939. After the seizure the police registered FIR No.4/2024 for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act and after completion of investigation charge- sheet has been filed against the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment dated 13/11/2024 has duly acquitted the appellant and other accused persons from the charge leveled against them under the NDPS Act. The order for confiscation of vehicle is passed is bad in law as the said vehicle was not seized from the spot by the investigating officer. petitioner is the registered owner of the Bullet motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG-17-KK-6021, Chassis No. ME3U3S5C1GA36939. The said vehicle was seized by the police in connection with Crime No. 04/2024, registered under Section 20 (B) (ii) (c) of the NDPS Act, 1985. The learned trial court in Para-52 of the judgment has categorically found that "no narcotic substance/Ganja was found in the said Motorcycle, the said vehicle was seized only on the basis of memorandum given by co-accused Baliram Naag (Ex. P-74), and in fact no vehicle number was stated or given by the co-accused on his memorandum. The Bullet motorcycle was seized from Baliram Nag under seizure memo which is exhibited under Exhibit P-57 as mentioned under Para-52 of trial court judgment. The independent witnesses Duryodhan Narayan Sethiya (PW-09), and Jugal Kishor Sethiya (PW-10) had turned hostile and have not supported the seizure and memorandum statement given by the accused persons, therefore from no iota of imagination the said vehicle is linked with the commission of alleged crime as mentioned in Para-'17. The documents 3 relating to Bullet Motor cycle is exhibited under Ex.P-78. He further submits that the appellant is not an accused in the said crime and the appellant is registered owner of the said vehicle. He further submits that the finding recorded by the leamed trial Court is against the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat 2003 SCC (Cri) 1943, in which it has held that it is of no use to keep articles in police custody for years till the trial is over. In such cases, the Court should pass appropriate order for disposal of property, as contemplated under Section 451 of CrPC. Therefore, it is prayed that the instant appeal may be allowed and Para 75 of impugned judgment which relates to confiscate of vehicle bearing registration No. CG-17-KK-6021 may be set aside and provide the said vehicle to the appellant, in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State/respondent opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellant and submits that the order passed by the trial Court is just and proper and requires no Interference. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused judgment passed by the learned trial Court as well as other material available on record with utmost circumspection. 6. On perusal of the order of the learned trial Court, para 52 of the judgment I have found that Bullet Motorcycle bearing registration number C.G.17 KK 6021 was seized from the co-accused Baliram Nag. Appellant is registered owner of the said Bullet motorcycle and no incriminating article was seized from the same, despite that in para 75 of the impugned judgment, learned Special Court has directed to confiscate aforesaid Bullet motorcycle after period of appeal. In the present case it is admitted fact that the appellant is a registered owner of the Bullet motorcycle bearing registration number C.G.17 KK 6021 and appellant has filed this appeal against the confiscation order of Special Judge of Section 452 of the CrPC. 4 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the parties, and particularly considering that the learned trial Court has passed the order to confiscate the vehicle of the appellant- Rajeev Singh without giving opportunity of hearing to him. He was not an accused in that case and he was registered owner of the said vehicle. Therefore, in considered opinion of this Court is that the order passed by the learned trial Court dated 13.11.2024 (Annexure A-1) passed in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act) No.37/2024 with regard to confiscation of said vehicle is hereby set aside and the vehicle of the appellant- Rajeev Singh be released forthwith. 8. With the aforesaid direction, the instant criminal appeal stands allowed and is
Decision
disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Kamde