9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 1258 - HC - Indian LawsSeizure of contraband substance - contraband substance was found having presence of Methaqualone - whether, the effected 951.350 Kg of contraband substance from the vehicle make Toyota Fortuner bearing registration No. DL 13CA 1800 pursuant to the disclosure made by Manu Khosla does cover under the NDPS Act, 1985? - the NDPS Act, 1985 which is a special law as compared to the general procedural law mentioned herein above. The NDPS Act, 1985 is applicable over the general law for the purposes of the present case - Held that - The Court below while dealing with the instant case went wrong on the point that, no offence under the NDPS Act was made out, for want of inclusion of Ketamine Hydrochloride in the Schedule of the NDPS Rules, 1985. The notification of the Department of Revenue of the Ministry of Finance with its Notification No.S.0.311.(E) dated 10.02.2011 declared Ketamine Hydrochloride to be a part of the schedule of the NDPS Act, thereby declaring it to be a psychotropic substance - The respondent is directed to surrender the vehicle make Toyota Fortuner bearing registration No. DL 13CA 1800 forthwith before the trial court, failing which the trial court will proceed further in accordance with law - petition allowed - decided against respondent assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Special Judge, NDPS cases, to release the vehicle on superdari. 2. Applicability of the NDPS Act over general procedural laws. 3. Validity of the impugned order dated 12.12.2013 directing the release of the vehicle. 4. Inclusion of Ketamine Hydrochloride in the NDPS Act. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Jurisdiction of the Special Judge, NDPS cases, to release the vehicle on superdari: The petitioner argued that the Special Judge, NDPS cases, lacked jurisdiction to entertain and dispose of the application for the release of the vehicle. The NDPS Act, being a special Act, overrides the general law under the Criminal Procedure Code, and there is no power conferred upon the special Court for the release of the vehicle on superdari under the NDPS Act. The court found that the Special Judge erred in holding that the vehicle was not required for any purpose by the petitioner at that stage, as reports in respect of 10 samples were still awaited from CFSL Hyderabad, and the investigation was pending. 2. Applicability of the NDPS Act over general procedural laws: The court emphasized that the NDPS Act, 1985, is a special law that overrides the general procedural laws mentioned under Sections 451, 452, and 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The NDPS Act is applicable over the general law for the purposes of the present case. The court relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in P.V. Hemalatha vs. Kattamkandi Puthiya Maliackal Saheeda and Another, 2002 5 SCC 548, to support this conclusion. 3. Validity of the impugned order dated 12.12.2013 directing the release of the vehicle: The court found that the lower court's order directing the release of the vehicle on superdari was incorrect. The vehicle was used in carrying a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, making it liable to confiscation under Section 60 of the NDPS Act. The court held that the lower court went wrong in concluding that no offence under the NDPS Act was made out due to the non-inclusion of Ketamine Hydrochloride in the Schedule of the NDPS Rules, 1985. 4. Inclusion of Ketamine Hydrochloride in the NDPS Act: The court noted that the Department of Revenue of the Ministry of Finance, through Notification No.S.0.311.(E) dated 10.02.2011, declared Ketamine Hydrochloride to be a part of the schedule of the NDPS Act, thereby declaring it to be a psychotropic substance. The court relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India and Another vs. Sanjeev V. Deshpande, AIR 2014 SC 3625, and the judgment of this Court in Directorate of Revenue Intelligence vs. Anil Kumar, 2014 (4) JCC 202, to support this conclusion. Conclusion: The court allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned order dated 12.12.2013 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS cases, Saket, New Delhi. The respondent was directed to surrender the vehicle forthwith before the trial court, failing which the trial court would proceed further in accordance with the law. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.
|
