Sapna v. State of Uttarakhand

The falsity of the instant FIR is prove from the fact that the petitioner and co-accused were arrested by the police at about 04:05 hours, whereas the FIR in question has been lodged about 06:10 hours, this vital delay of about 2:05 hours in lodging of the FIR has not satisfactorily been explained by the prosecution, whereas the distance of police station from the place of incident is hardly 6 km, this clearly shows that the police has falsely implicated the present petitioner and co-accused in the instant case crime.

5. The bare reading of the FIR cum recovery memo also clearly reveals that the alleged contraband of Ganja is shown to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner is 10.05 kg, which is below the commercial Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 759 of 2025 - Sapna v. State of Uttarakhand 3 Ashish Naithani J. quantity. The petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle, which was intercepted and seized in connection with the aforesaid crime registered against the petitioner under NDPS Act and is now in custody of police.

6. The accused in the aforesaid FIR, therefore, moved an application seeking his release on bail before the Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, which was granted, thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for release of the said vehicle, but learned court below vide order dated 11.03.2024 dismissed the said application of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is the sister of named accused person Digvijay Singh and it might have been possibility that Digvijay Singh has used the vehicle in commission of crime after taking consent from the petitioner, the vehicle ought to have been released in custody of its registered owner, therefore, the order dated 11.03.2025 deserves and is liable to be set-aside.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

8. It is contended by learned counsel for the Applicant that the vehicle has been lying unattended at the police station compound and the same is exposed to Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 759 of 2025 - Sapna v. State of Uttarakhand 4 Ashish Naithani J. the vagaries of the weather and miscreants, till the conclusion of trial, it will result into vehicle get damaged and reduce its value substantially which will not benefit the state or the owner. There is no use of keeping vehicle there in police station and the said vehicle be released in her favour.

9. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Bishwajit Dey vs. The State of Assam” (Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025) delivered on 07.01.2025.

10. Per contra, learned State counsel poses his formal objection in this regard.

11. I have gone through the judgment and order relied upon by learned counsel for the Applicant rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court along with provisions of Sections 451 and 457 of CrPC.

12. For ready reference, para nos.22 and 23 of ‘Bishwajit Dey’ (supra) are quoted hereinbelow:- “22. This Court is further of the opinion that there is no specific bar/restriction under the provisions of the NDPS Act for return of any seized vehicle used for Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 759 of 2025 - Sapna v. State of Uttarakhand 5 Ashish Naithani J. transporting narcotic drug or psychotropic substance in the interim pending disposal of the criminal case.

23. In the absence of any specific bar under the NDPS Act and in view of Section 51 of NDPS Act, the Court can invoke the general power under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C. for return of the seized vehicle pending case. Consequently, the trial Court has the discretion to release the vehicle in the interim. However, this power would have to be exercised in accordance with law in the facts and circumstances of each case.” final decision of criminal The Hon’ble Apex Court has allowed the appeal with a direction to the trial court to release the vehicle in question in the interim supurdagi.

13. Thus, the impugned order dated 11.03.2025 passed by learned In-charge Special Judge (NDPS Act)/1st Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital cannot sustain and deserves to be quashed and is accordingly quashed.

14. Thus the writ petition is allowed. The vehicle in-question is directed to be released in favour of the petitioner after executing personal bond of `1,00,000/- and one local sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned along with an undertaking that ownership of the vehicle would not be altered, sold or transfer, in any manner, whatsoever, without the permission of the court and she shall Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 759 of 2025 - Sapna v. State of Uttarakhand 6 Ashish Naithani J. produce the vehicle either before the court concerned or before such other Authority as the Court may direct. Akash AKASH Digitally signed by AKASH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=dae2472c001d56469ea76fc0caa68f48ef73518c148d14 0566ab1e26f9cbe61d, postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=27096a1625377537a487dee49224c891823fc6a0 334628b21e516047ed4f22f7, cn=AKASH (Ashish Naithani, J.)

01.09.2025 Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 759 of 2025 - Sapna v. State of Uttarakhand 7 Ashish Naithani J.