Court rules vehicle linked to drug transport cannot be released on superdari under NDPS Act.

The court held that the Special Judge, NDPS cases, lacked jurisdiction to release the vehicle on superdari under the NDPS Act. It emphasized the Act's applicability over general procedural laws and declared the impugned order directing the vehicle's release as incorrect due to its involvement in drug transportation. Ketamine Hydrochloride was deemed part of the NDPS Act schedule. The petition was allowed, setting aside the release order and directing the vehicle's surrender to the trial court.

---

---

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.

---