Interim Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 43.
BAIL SC/178/2026(IA-1)
ST VS MANISH KUMAR PRASAD
FIR No. 537/2025
PS KESHAV PURAM
20.05.2026
Present : Sh. K D Pachauri, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Nishant, Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused(through
VC).
This is an application for release of vehicle bearing no
DL-11N-7924 on superdari to its registered owner on the ground that the
above noted case is pending before this Court and that the applicant is the
registered owner of the aforesaid vehicle and that the above said vehicle
is not required for investigation purpose. Hence, the application.
Reply has already been filed by IO wherein it is mentioned
that recovery of commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered
from the possession of accused, who were apprehended while
transporting contraband on scooty, hence, the said scooty may not be
released as it may be possible that the accused will not produce the
scooty.
Heard. Perused.
It has been held by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Madan
Lal Vs. State, National Capital 96 (2002) DLT 803 that :
“6. On a combined reading of Sections 60 (3) and 63 it is
clear that any conveyance used or carrying any narcotic drug or psytropic
substance is liable to confiscation after hearing the person who may
claim any right thereto and considering the evidence, if any, which he
may produce, in support of the claim and confiscation order can be made
-- 1 of 3 --
only at the end of trial. Neither the said two sections or any other section
contained in the Act empowers the trial court to make an order for proper
custody of such a conveyance pending trial. To be noted that by virtue of
Section 51, the provisions of Cod of Criminal Procedure 1973 have been
made applicable in so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions
of the Act, to all warrants issued and arrests, searches and seizures mad
under the Act. Obviously, provision made in said Section 451 Cr.P.C is
so far as it relates to passing of order for proper custody of conveyance
pending conclusion of trial, is not inconsistent with any of the sections of
the Act including Sections 60 (3) and 63. Thus, in appropriate cases order
for release of conveyance used for carrying contraband pending
conclusion of trial can be made under Section 451 by the court”.
Following this, Honb'le High Court of Delhi in Ashok Kumar
Kapoor Vs. State of NCT of Delhi Crl.M.C No. 2360/2018 dated
02.08.2018; set aside the order of rejection of vehicle of superdari,
in case FIR No. 581/2017 under Section 21/61/85 NDPS Act, and
ordered release of the case property i.e. vehicle on superdari to the
petitioner.
In view of the above, the vehicle No. DL-11N-7924 be
released to the applicant/rightful owner on furnishing indemnity bond in
sum of Rs. 80,000/- to the IO on furnishing formalities. Photographs of
the vehicle be taken from all the angles, depicting the engine number and
chassis number of the vehicle and be placed on record along with
superdarinama by IO.
Since the case property is the subject matter of confiscation
under Section 60 of NDPS Act which shall be decided at the end of trial,
the Superdar is directed not to dispose of or create any 3rd party interest
in the case property i.e. aforesaid vehicle and shall produce the same
-- 2 of 3 --
before the Court as and when directed.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the order be given dasti. Copy thereof be also sent
to IO/SHO concerned for information and compliance.
(SHIVAJI ANAND)
ASJ-II/SPECIAL JUDGE NDPS/
NORTH-WEST/ROHINI COURTS/
DELHI/20.05.2026
-- 3 of 3 --