https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280269 A vehicle used to transport a commercial quantity of poppy straw was treated as liable to confiscation under Section 60(3) of the NDPS Act unless the owner could show that the use occurred without knowledge or connivance and despite reasonable precautions. The owner's own statement that the vehicle had been sold under an agreement for sale, together with the fact that the person in possession at the relevant time was the purchaser and not the petitioner, defeated the claim for interim custody. On those facts, the vehicle was not releasable on superdari and the request for interim custody was rejected. en-us Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Apr 2019 12:05:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280269 A vehicle used to transport a commercial quantity of poppy straw was treated as liable to confiscation under Section 60(3) of the NDPS Act unless the owner could show that the use occurred without knowledge or connivance and despite reasonable precautions. The owner's own statement that the vehicle had been sold under an agreement for sale, together with the fact that the person in possession at the relevant time was the purchaser and not the petitioner, defeated the claim for interim custody. On those facts, the vehicle was not releasable on superdari and the request for interim custody was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280269