IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2486 of 2008() ------------------------------ CMP.90/2008 of SPL. COURT (NDPS ACT CASES), THODUPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DUSHYANTHA KUMAR, S/O.VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, MECHERI VILASAM, ANAKULAM KARA, MANKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. 2. EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, N.E.S, ADIMALI. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No. 2486 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25 th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, who is the owner of a jeep bearing registration No.KL-6-1482 which was allegedly carrying 12.600 gms of dried ganja on 26.6.07 and who was arrested from the jeep by the Excise Circle Inspector, Adimaly resulting in his registering C.R.No.11/2007 of N.E.S, Adimaly, challenges the order dated 20.5.08 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Act cases, Thodupuzha dismissing his application (CMP No.90 of 2008) for interim custody of vehicle. 2. The only reason given by the court below in support of the dismissal was that the vehicle was liable to be confiscated, in the event of the prosecution succeeding in establishing the offence under the NDPS Act. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. In as much as the vehicle in question is not required by the Investigating Agency for the purpose of investigation of the case and the only objection is that the vehicle is liable to be confiscated in case the case ends in Crl.R.P.No. 2486 of 2008 2 conviction, cannot be a good ground to reject the petitioner's request for interim custody of the vehicle in the light of the decision in Sunderbai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat ( 2003(2) KLT 1089 (SC). Accordingly, the vehicle is directed to be released on the interim custody to the petitioner on his furnishing a bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle to be assessed by the Excise Inspector, Adimaly and subject to the following terms and conditions:- 1. The petitioner shall keep the vehicle in the same condition in which it is released to him. 2. The petitioner shall not sell the vehicle wholly or in part nor shall he put the vehicle in the possession of any other person. 3. The petitioner shall produce the vehicle before the Special Judge as and when directed to do so. 4. The interim custody of the vehicle shall be subject to final orders in the case. Dated this the 25 th day of July, 2008. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj