IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1255 of 2007 SMT.ARUNA MALHOTRA Versus THE UNION OF INDIA ----------- 03/ 29-09-2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel representing the Department of Custom, Union of India and also learned counsel for the State of Bihar. Petitioner has prayed to set aside the order dated 17.08.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Patna whereby the petitioner’s prayer for release of truck bearing registration no. HR-47A-4105 has been rejected. It appears that the officers of Customs Headquarters Patna on the basis of specific information intercepted vehicle bearing registration no. HR-47A-4105 near Gandhi Setu, Patna. It was searched in presence of two independent witnesses and three packets of Ganja total 60 kgs. was found concealed in Real Active Apple Juice packets. The driver confessed before the custom officials which led to Special Case No. 24 of 2007 under Section 8 of N.D.P.S. Act. The driver was arrested and the truck and all other articles were seized. It appears that prayer for release of the truck in question has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Patna on the ground that Section 60 of the N.D.P.S. Act empowers the court to confiscate the truck which was found carrying Ganja. - 2 - According to learned counsel of the Custom Department confiscation proceeding has been initiated. Section 63 Sub-Section (1) of the N.D.P.S. Act reads as follows:- “In the trial of offences under this Act, whether the accused is convicted or acquitted or discharged, the Court shall decide whether any article or thing seized under this Act is liable to confiscation under Section 60 or Section 61 or Section 62 and, if it decides that the article is so liable, it may order confiscation accordingly.” Section 63 of the Act, therefore, prescribes the procedure to be followed in making the confiscations. It is admitted position that the trial has not commenced as yet. It appears that the truck was seized by the Custom officials on 29.4.2007 and thus a period more than one and half year has elapsed. These items like the present one are open to vagaries of nature when they are left uncared for. In such circumstances, only because there is a provision empowering the Court or Custom officials to confiscate the truck, it will not be proper to reject the prayer for release of truck during the entire period of pendency of criminal case. It has been submitted that the petitioner is owner of the truck in question. In the circumstances, the prayer for release of the truck is allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside. It is - 3 - made clear that this Court has not examined the papers of ownership relating to the truck in question and it will be for the Sessions Judge, Patna to verify the original documents and he should release the truck in favour of the petitioner only when he satisfied that his claim for the truck is supported by the legal documents and the release shall be ad interim during the pendency of criminal case on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Sessions Judge, Patna. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. S.Sb/- (Madhavendra Saran, J.)