Interim release of vehicles seized under NDPS Act permitted subject to CrPC safeguards and protective conditions; vehicle released.

Interim release of vehicles seized in alleged NDPS offences can be ordered prior to conviction by applying the Criminal Procedure Code principles governing custody, delivery and disposal of property; this prevents deterioration of commercial value while preserving evidentiary integrity, and the court may impose conditions to prevent misuse or alienation and require production when needed. Confiscation remains a consequence only after conviction and confiscation proceedings commence post-trial. Trial courts are empowered to record interim release with the vehicle registry to block third-party interests and to impose mandatory protective conditions while other infrastructural conditions are implemented as practicable. Revision was allowed and interim release directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized vehicle involved in an NDPS offence should be released interimly to the recorded owner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. subject to conditions and safeguards.

Analysis: The Court examined the scope of Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. and their application to vehicles seized in NDPS cases, the substantive confiscation regime under Section 60(3) and the procedure under Section 63 of the NDPS Act, and the saving clause in Section 51 of the NDPS Act regarding inconsistency with the Cr.P.C. Authorities and prior High Court directions on release and safeguarding of vehicles (including preparation of panchnama, digital photographs/video, valuation report, encryption and storage, and obtaining security bonds) were applied to address loss of commercial value and decay of seized vehicles. The Court distinguished between evidentiary value and mere property value and noted that where the vehicle has primarily property value, interim release with appropriate conditions and safeguards (panchnama, photographic record, valuation, bond, undertakings, insurance, RTO/RTA intimation and prohibition on transfer) will protect both trial needs and the rights of the owner, while preserving ability to effect confiscation after conviction.

Conclusion: The revision is allowed and the impugned order rejecting interim release is set aside; the seized vehicle is directed to be released interimly to the recorded owner subject to the conditions and safeguards as laid down (detailed panchnama, digital photographs and encrypted video, valuation by approved valuer, security bond, and mandatory undertakings and RTO/RTA intimation).

---