p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.7 of 2025 Sumi Sam L …. Petitioner(s) Mr. M. Padhy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. S. J. Mohanty, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 15.01.2025 01. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Koraput in M.C. Case No.66 of 2024, whereby his application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for release of Hyundai Verna bearing Registration No.KL-07-BJ-8283 vide engine No.D4FA8U640080 and Chassis No.MALCM41VR8M059257 has been turned down. 3. The petitioner is one of the accused in Padwa P.S. Case No.38 of 2022 for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)B of the NDPS Act. He is the owner of the vehicle. The application of the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for released of the vehicle, which was employed for the commission p. 2 of the offence under the NDPS Act as mentioned above has been turned down. The learned trial Court has given the following reasoning while rejecting the application:- <that means only the Investigating Agency or The 10 of the case can file application for release of the seized conveyances. On further perusal of all those decisions of the Hon'ble Court it is seen that, no where the Hon'ble Court has mentioned that this court has power to deal with the applications to release the seized vehicles under NDPS Act as per the provision of Section 457 of Cr.P.C. Hence, this court lacks jurisdiction to deal with the release of the present vehicle seized under NDPS Act under the provision of Section.457 Cr.P.C. Moreover, had it been an application/petition U/s.52-A of the NDPS Act this Court is also unable to release the alleged vehicle as per the instruction issued under Para-5 and 6 of the CRLREV No.404 of 2020, No. 185 of 2021 and No. 177 of 2021 of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa as this application/petition has not been made either by the Investigating Agency or by the Prosecuting Agency. More particularly the SOP/guidelines issued in the division Bench judgment in State of Orissa Vrs. Registrar General, Orissa High Court vide Para No.25 have been vividly interpreted and discussed by the Hon'ble Justice S.Pujari wherein he has given the finding that proceeding must be initiated through the Investigating Agency/Prosecution as the right to make application by the petitioner does not anymore survives since the same is subject to pre-trial disposal as per Section 52-A of the NDPS Act. But in this case the owner/petitioner has filed this application/petition through his counsel. Therefore, giving utmost regard to the decisions of the Hon’ble Court I am not inclined to allow the petition. Hence, this petition is rejected.” 4. The sole ground of rejection of the application is that since the application was not initiated/moved by the prosecution or the p. 3 Investigating Agency, the same cannot find favour from the Court. The learned trial Court has relied upon the judgment of this Court passed in CRLREV No.404 of 2020 and W.P.(C) No.32580 of 2021 while rejecting the prayer of the petitioner. 5. Mr. Padhy, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court dated 04.02.2023 passed in CRLREV No. 32 of 2020 ,Nakka Sankar Rao v. State of Odisha relevant part reads as under:- <6.Accordingly, giving liberty to the Prosecution/Investigating Agency to seek disposal of the conveyance in question under Section 52-A of the NDPS Act before the Magistrate concerned and in that event, the Magistrate concerned shall deal with the same in accordance with law, more particularly in the light of the directions given in the abovementioned Division Bench judgment of this Court, this CRLREV stands disposed of. 7. However, so far as seizure of other articles, if any, is concerned, the petitioner is also at liberty to approach the Court where the case is pending for release of the same and in that event, the same shall be decided on its own merit, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, notwithstanding the earlier rejection by the Court concerned.= 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent judgment has also authoritatively held that the NDPS Act does not create a Bar for interim release of the vehicle under Section 451 or 457 of Cr.P.C seized in a case of NDPS offence. This Court also in an order dated p. 4 16.02.2024 passed in CRLMC No. 1463 of 2023 in the case of Rajesh Adakatia v. State of Odisha has expressed the similar view. 7. Perusal of the aforementioned judgments would make it clear that NDPS Act provides for disposal of the conveyance allegedly employed in the commission of crime. However, there is no statutory bar in releasing of the vehicle on Zimanama with any condition that may be deemed fit and proper to be imposed by the Court. Therefore, the court below has not appropriately applied the ratio of the judgments to the present case and rejected the application. 8. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Koraput in M.C. Case No.66 of 2024 is set aside. The petitioner is allowed to move an application before the Court below in that regard afresh for interim release of the vehicle. If such application is moved, the same shall be considered by the Court below on the basis of the judgments of this Court as referred to above as well as the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in that regard. 9. With this observation, the CRLMC is disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna