Financer to approach Civil court in pending proceedings

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), Section 451 - If the financier was aggrieved by the order directing release of the vehicle in favour of the registered owner of the vehicle, it was open for the financier to approach the civil court in the pending civil suit for interference. 2002 SCeJ 001

Vehicle ordered to be released in favour of the Financer

Motor Vehicles Act 1988 Section 51, 55(5), 61 – Hypothecation – Financer - Possession taken by Financer – FIR lodged against financer - Hypothecation was removed on basis of forged Form 35 by original owner (loanee) - Registration transferred to new owner – New registration cancelled by Regional Transport Officer - Vehicle ordered to be released in favour of the Financer. #2021 SCeJ 053

See also : Section 51 - MVA

Vehicle used for transporting the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances can also be released on sapurdari invoking the provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 451, Section 451 A, Section 452, Section 457 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS), Section 21 - Vehicle used for transporting the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances can also be released on sapurdari invoking the provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C. - There is no provision under the NDPS Act debarring the release of the vehicle for interim custody - The provision under Section 451 Cr.P.C. which is found not inconsistent with the provisions of the NDPS Act is applicable to the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act as well - No differential treatment to the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act is contemplated either under the provisions of the NDPS Act or under the ratio laid down by the Court of law - The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case will apply to the vehicles seized under the NDPS Act as well - Any contrary view taken by the Courts of law would be against the interest of the owner of the vehicles, the public at large and the State.

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2007 (2) RCR (Criminal) 561, Iqbal Singh v. State of Punjab, 2013(2) RCR (Criminal) 612 and Raghbir Singh alias Beera v. State of Punjab, 2006(4) RCR (Criminal) 343, reflect the correct proposition of law.

Kirandeep v. State of Punjab , CRR No.3231 of 2014 on 12.12.2014 based on the decision in Dinesh Kumar Verma's case (Union of India Vs. Dinesh Kumar Verma, (2005) 9 SCC 330) does not reflect the correct proposition of law.

2016 PLRonline 001

A conveyance seized under the NDPS Act shall be liable to confiscation only when the owner of the conveyance who was given an opportunity by the Court could not prove that the conveyance was used without his knowledge or connivance

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 451, Section 451 A, Section 452, Section 457 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS), Section 21 - A conveyance seized under the NDPS Act shall be liable to confiscation only when the owner of the conveyance who was given an opportunity by the Court could not prove that the conveyance was used without his knowledge or connivance - The Court will have to decide whether a vehicle seized under the NDPS Act is liable to confiscation only on conclusion of trial - The trial Court has to take independent decision on the question of confiscation irrespective of the conviction or acquittal or discharge recorded by it. But, at any rate, the trial Court is not supposed to pass any order of confiscation before expiry of one month from the date of seizure or without affording opportunity to the claimant.

2016 PLRonline 001