Criminal Revision No.1447 of 2011(O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No.1447 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: September 27, 2011 Ravinder Singh ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr.Jagjit Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sudhir Nehra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondent – State. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) Challenge is to the order dated April 27th, 2011 passed by Judge, Special Court, Kapurthala, whereby, application of the petitioner to release his truck bearing Reg.No.HR38D-4612, taken into possession in case First Information Report (for short `FIR') No.140 dated November 10th, 2009 under Section 15 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (herein for short `the Act'), Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala, was dismissed. On November 10th, 2009, truck of the petitioner was intercepted and its search was conducted. It was found carrying 50 bags, each, containing 35 kilograms of poppy husk. Mandeep Singh, driver of the truck was arrested. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that it was not in the knowledge of the petitioner that the truck was being used for carrying poppy husk, so the truck be released to him on Superdari. In support of his contention, he has relied upon two judgments passed by this Court; (i) Criminal Miscellaneous No.34126 of 2010 titled “Surinder singh @ Sinder vs. State of Haryana” decided on September 10th, 2010, and (ii) Harpreet Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2006(4) RCR(Crl) 719. In Surinder Singh's case, a tractor-trolley was seized in connection with FIR No.92 dated May 21st, 2006, registered under Section 15 of the Act in Police Criminal Revision No.1447 of 2011(O&M) [2] Station Nissing, District Karnal. Son of the petitioner was arrested. He was convicted and sentenced. Against the judgment of sentence and conviction, his appeal was pending before this Court. His mother Surjit Kaur, who was widow, in whose name the tractor was, filed the application for release of the tractor-trolley to her on superdari. This Court gave the custody of the tractor-trolley to her on superdari till the confiscation proceedings were not completed, because during trial no such proceedings were initiated. In Harpreet Singh's case, a truck carrying six bags of poppy husk was released on `superdari' by this Court. In Surender Singh's case (supra), the petitioner was a widow and mother of the accused. Vehicle used in carrying the contraband was a tractor. In view of that, it was not possible for the widow to have the knowledge that the tractor was being used by her son for carrying contraband items. In Harpreet Singh's case (supra), the quantity seized was only six bags of poppy husk. The facts of the case in hand are entirely different from the facts of the cases, referred to in the aforesaid authorities. Herein, truck was intercepted while carrying 50 bags of poppy husk, which is a huge quantity. So, the authorities are of no help to the petitioner. There is no evidence on record to say that it was not in the knowledge of the petitoner that poppy husk was being carried in his truck, because trial is still pending. Taking into consideration, the totality of facts and circusmtances of the case, in considered opinion of this Court, it shall not be in the interest of justice to release the truck on `Superdari' to the petitioner. Thus, the revision is dismissed. September 27, 2011 ( NAWAB SINGH ) `gian' JUDGE