Interim custody of NDPS-seized vehicles remains available under criminal procedure when not inconsistent with the special Act.

The NDPS Act does not, by itself, exclude the Code of Criminal Procedure from operating on custody of seized property where there is no inconsistency. The scheme of Sections 51, 55, 60 and 63 indicates that confiscation is ultimately considered at trial, but it does not require every seized vehicle to remain in custody until trial ends. An innocent owner may seek interim custody, and a Magistrate may grant it under Section 451 or Section 457(1) in a proper case, provided the discretion is exercised judicially on the material before the court. The impugned custody order was set aside as arbitrary and unsustainable for want of such consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Magistrate had jurisdiction to order interim return of a vehicle seized under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and whether the impugned order granting custody was sustainable.

Analysis: The seizure of the vehicle under the NDPS Act did not, by itself, exclude the operation of the Code of Criminal Procedure where its provisions were not inconsistent with the special Act. The scheme of Sections 51, 55, 60 and 63 showed that confiscation is ultimately to be considered at the trial stage, but it did not require the vehicle to remain in custody till the end of trial in every case. An innocent owner could seek interim custody, and in a proper case the Magistrate could exercise power under Section 451 or Section 457(1) of the Code. The Magistrate, however, was required to exercise that discretion judicially on the basis of the materials before the court.

Conclusion: The Magistrate had jurisdiction to consider interim custody, but the impugned order was arbitrary and unsustainable for want of judicial consideration of the relevant material. The order was set aside and the matter was left to be decided afresh on a proper application before the Sessions Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure governing custody of seized property continue to apply to NDPS seizures unless they are inconsistent with the Act, and interim custody may be granted by a competent court in a proper case pending trial.

---