Sangram Singh Alias Santosh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

By means of the present C528 application, the applicant has put to challenge the order dated 21.09.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S.

in Misc. Release Application No.290 of 2024, in S.S.T. No.280 of 2020 “State of Uttarakhand Vs. Sangram Singh @ Santosh†under Sections

8/20/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Pantnagar, District Udham Singh Nagar to release the Vehicle No. UK04-CB-5197 in

favour of the applicant, claiming himself to be registered owner of the said vehicle.

Facts of the case as reflected from the FIR are that the aforesaid vehicle was intercepted by the Police and on search contraband (31 kgc haras)

was recovered from the vehicle and accordingly offence under the provisions of Sections 8/20/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 was registered against four

occupants of the vehicle, including the applicant.

Applicant â€" Sangram Singh @ Santosh is owner of the aforesaid vehicle and during trial he moved an application purportedly under Section 497

of B.N.S.S., 2023 to the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. for release of the aforesaid vehicle.

It was pleaded by the applicant in his application that he was owner of the aforesaid vehicle and the vehicle would diminish in its value by keeping it

in the police station, therefore, he wants his vehicle to be released on such terms and conditions fixed by learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S.

The said application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. vide impugned order dated 21.09.2024.

It is against the aforesaid order, the petitioner is before this Court.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is registered owner of the vehicle and that fact is also admitted to the respondent-State.

The respondent has also filed his counter affidavit in the present C528 application, in which it is admitted that the applicant is owner of the vehicle.

It is further submitted in the counter affidavit that in the vehicle there was a cabin and the vehicle is needed during trial to prove the said fact.

Having considered the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the provision of Section 497 of B.N.S.S.,

2023 which is similar to the provision of Section 452 of Cr.P.C., 1973 empowers a court/Magistrate regarding disposal of the property or delivery of

such property to such person who is entitled to get possession thereof.

This Court is not inclined to accept the argument advanced on behalf of respondent-State, particularly when the ownership of the vehicle was not

disputed

In this view of the matter, the C528 application is allowed. Vehicle No. UK04-CB-5197 is directed to be released in favour of the applicant on his

executing personal bond and two local heavy sureties each to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

The applicant owner shall also give undertaking as per the Rules before the learned trial court that during the pendency of the trial he shall not

transfer the vehicle to any third party and further he would produce the vehicle as and when required.