NDPS confiscation proceedings require fresh merits review and hearing before legality can be determined under law.

Confiscation proceedings under the NDPS Act required fresh judicial scrutiny where the High Court had not examined the notice, confiscation order and Tribunal confirmation on merits. The Supreme Court held that the rival claims should be considered afresh after giving both sides an opportunity of hearing, so the legality of the confiscation can be determined in accordance with law. The High Court's order was set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court's order rejecting the application and treating the earlier writ order as not granting relief was sustainable, and whether the confiscation order required reconsideration on merits.

Analysis: The confiscation proceedings had been initiated under Section 68-I of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The dispute arising from the notice, the confiscation order, and its confirmation by the Tribunal had not been examined by the High Court on merits. The matter required a fresh examination of the rival claims, with an opportunity of hearing to both sides, so that the legality of the confiscation could be determined in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The High Court's order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the High Court for reconsideration on merits.

---