https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280286 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. en-us Thu, 02 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Apr 2019 15:03:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280286 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. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 02 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280286