Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010252472025 2025:GAU-AS:16281 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1465/2025 RATAN DAS SON OF LATE GAURANG DAS RESIDENT OF 75 SARKAR TILLA KAXMIBIL PO AND PS BISHALDARGH DISTRICT WEST TRIPURA TRIPURA VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ANR REPRESENTED BY STANDING COUNSEL NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU 2:MANORANJAN RAY IO JR INTELLIGANCE OFFICER NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT GUWAHATI-36 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS, A GHOSAL,J SINGPHO Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 28.11.2025 Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned standing counsel for NCB. Page No.# 2/5 2. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed praying for zimma of the Maruti Ertiga car bearing registration no. TR- 01-BR-0249 and chasis no. MA3BNC22MM426790, along with the ignition key of the said car. 3. The car had been seized in connection with NDPS Case No. 36/2023 corresponding to NCB Crime No. 21/2022 under Section 20 (b)(ii)(C)/28/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 pending before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup (M), Guwahati. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner herein had been arrested in connection with the aforesaid case and has been granted bail by an order of this Court passed on 17.02.2025, passed in Bail Appln./2437/2024. The petitioner had moved an application claiming for zimma with regard to the Maruti Ertiga car mentioned hereinbefore and by order dated 23.07.2025, the prayer for zimma had been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup (M), Guwahati. The learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to paragraph no. 21 of the order dated 23.07.2025 to submit that the zimma of the aforesaid car had been rejected only on an assumption that the car was escorting the container truck and observing safe transportation of ‘ganja’ from Tripura to Bihar. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that of the Apex Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai V. State of Gujarat, reported as (2002) 10 SCC 283, has held that “ it is no of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period and it would be for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guaratee as well as security for return of the said vehicles if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.” Page No.# 3/5 The Apex Court had also observed that the applications seeking zimma of vehicles should be decided promptly to ensure that articles are not kept for a long time at the police station and in case not more than 15 days to 1 (one) month. The learned counsel submits that though this was not a case under the NDPS Act, however, it remains a settled position of law that the vehicles seized in connection of offences can be considered for release on zimma depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the case of Biswajit Dey V. State of Assam, reported in (2025) 3 SCC 241, wherein he has referred to paragraph no. 26 and 33 to impress upon the Court that even in case of vehicles seized in connection with offences under NDPS Act, there is no specific bar or restriction for return of any seized vehicle used for transporting any narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances in the interim pending disposal of the criminal case. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case the vehicle of which zimma had been sought was not used either in the transport of any contraband substance nor any such contraband substances recovered from either the vehicle or the owner of the vehicle, who is applicant herein and who is the accused in the case. 6. Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned standing counsel for the NCB has drawn the attention of this Court to Section 60 of the NDPS Act, 1985 to impress that “as per Sub-section 3 “any animal or conveyance used in carrying any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or any article liable to confiscation under Sub-section 1 or Sub-section 2 shall be liable to confiscation unless the owner of the animal or conveyance proves that it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any the person in-charge of the animal or conveyance and that each of that had taken all reasonable precautions against Page No.# 4/5 such use”. 7. The learned standing counsel for the NCB has submitted that in case the vehicle is now allowed to be taken away on zimma, it may hamper the Trial since the vehicle may be required to be produced in the Trial proceedings and also in case the vehicle is found to be involved in the alleged offences, it would be required to be confiscated. He has therefore prayed that the prayer made in the present petition be rejected. 8. The learned standing counsel for NCB has also referred to the stand taken in the written objections filed on behalf of the NCB/ Union of India. 9. This Court has gone through the provisions of Section 60 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and is of the considered opinion that provisions of the said section does not provide any bar or restriction for consideration of release of vehicle on zimma to owners of vehicle, in cases where the vehicles are suspected to be involved in illicit trade of contraband substances. 10. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Biswajit Dey (Supra) has observed that “even where the Court is of the view that the seized vehicles can be confiscated by the trial court only on conclusion of the trial when the accused is convicted or acquitted or discharged.” 11. The vehicle had been seized on 26.09.2022 and the charge-sheet had been filed on 21.03.2023. The Trial is proceeding in the matter. The vehicle has been kept un-used for a long time. In view of the observations made by the Apex Court in Biswajit Dey (Supra) and Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (Supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that the owner of the vehicle namely the petitioner herein can be allowed to take zimma of the Maruti Ertiga car bearing registration no. TR-01-BR-0249 and chasis no. MA3BNC22MM426790, along with the ignition key to the said vehicle by execution of a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- Page No.# 5/5 ( Rs. One Lakh) one subject to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. Further, with following conditions:- a. The I.O shall also retain video and still photographs of the vehicle and after obtaining all information and documents necessary for identification of vehicle. b. The petitioner shall not sell or part ownership of the vehicle till conclusion of the trial and shall also furnish and undertaking to the Trial Court that he should surrender the vehicle within a week of being so directed by the Court. 12. The Crl.Pet is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant