1 2025:CGHC:21366 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 424 of 2019 Chhotelal Patwa S/o Shri Dukalu Patwa Aged About 55 Years R/o Bundeli, Chowki Rajgamar, District - Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Balco Nagar, (Police Chowki Rajgamar), District - Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Lavkush Kumar Sahu , Advocate For State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Judgment on Board 08.05.2025 1. The present criminal appeal filed under Section 454 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 11.08.2016 (Annexure A/1) passed by the learned Special Judge, (N.D.P.S.), District Korba in Special Criminal (NDPS) Case No. 81/2014. 2. Brief facts of the case are such that the vehicle TVS Motorcycle has been seized by the Police Chowki Rajgamar, Police Station Balco Nagar in Crime No. 268/2014 alleging that on 15.09.2014 at about 16:20 police 2 received an information by an informant that an unknown person has kept drugs in the motorcycle bearing registration no. CG 13/S/8147 and the vehicle was thereafter seized by the Police. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned trial court has passed the order which is bad, illegal and contrary to the law. The learned trial court has failed to see that the appellant is the owner of the said vehicle, and he is having the original documents of the vehicle, therefore, he is entitled for the supurdnama of the said vehicle. He also submits that the vehicle is a machinery and is standing in the open area therefore, the vehicle would be rubbished and damaged, the loss of which will ultimately be born by the appellant only. The said vehicle is not involved in any other crime and he is ready to furnish adequate security and shall abide by all the directions and conditions which may be imposed by this court. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Looking to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the documents available on record, the fact that the said vehicle (motorcycle bearing registration no. CG 13 S 8147) from whose dikki the contraband was seized is sought to be released on supurdnama. It is pertinent to mention here that Appellant is an accused in special criminal (NDPS) case No. 81/2014. Allegation is that accused 3 was carrying three kilogram ganja in his motorcycle bearing registration no. CG 13 S 8147. It is also important fact that applicant/accused was convicted by Special Judge NDPS Act and sentenced him 05 years rigorous imprisonment with fine as per provision of Section 60(3) of the NDPS Act. Any conveyance used in carrying any Narcotic drug or psychotropic substance is liable to be confiscated under Section 60(1) and 60(2) of the NDPS Act, unless owner of the conveyance/vehicle proves that it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself. In this case owner itself carrying ganja and trial court has convicted him under NDPS Act, therefore, trial court has rightly confiscated the vehicle. Hence the present appeal for release of the seized vehicle on supurdnama being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE alfiza