38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, October 31, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Supreme Court Orders Release of Seized Vehicle in NDPS Case, Cites Owner’s Discharge and Trial Delay, Reduces Surety Bond [Read Order]

By Jhanak Sharma      23 April, 2025 01:56 PM      0 Comments
Supreme Court Orders Release of Seized Vehicle in NDPS Case Cites Owners Discharge and Trial Delay Reduces Surety Bond

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has delivered a significant directive allowing the release of a vehicle seized in connection with an NDPS case with a reduced surety bond, emphasizing the importance of balancing property rights with judicial requirements.

Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan made crucial observations on the rights of vehicle owners whose property becomes involved in criminal investigations despite their non-involvement in the alleged offenses.

The Court was hearing a criminal appeal filed by Tarun Kumar Majhi. It noted, “The present appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 15th July 2024 passed by the High Court at Calcutta in C.R.R. No. 1439 of 2021, by which the High Court directed furnishing of a surety bond of Rs. 6,00,000/- for the release of the vehicle, i.e., Hyundai Xcent, belonging to the appellant.”

Addressing the specific circumstances of the seizure, the Court observed, “The aforesaid vehicle, owned by the appellant-advocate, was seized in 2017 in connection with the investigation of a case registered as Nandanghat P.S. Case No. 180 of 2017 on 15th July 2017 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.”

The Court highlighted the appellant’s non-involvement in the case, stating, “Though the name of the appellant was initially mentioned in the First Information Report (FIR), he was discharged from the case during the investigation in 2017 itself, based on the specific statement of the Investigating Officer before the Trial Court. However, the appellant’s car has remained in police custody as alamat of the case.”

Detailing the case history, the Court noted, “The learned Special Judge (NDPS), 3rd Court, Burdwan, West Bengal, in Special (NDPS) Case No. 34 of 2017, acquitted four of the five accused persons on 23rd December 2020. The trial against the fifth accused is yet to commence, as he is absconding.”

The Court also considered the submissions of the appellant. “Ms. Paromita Majumdar, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that since the appellant was exonerated during the investigation in 2017, the vehicle should have been released unconditionally. She further submitted that the current value of the vehicle does not justify the imposition of a surety bond of Rs. 6,00,000/-.”

The Court emphasized compliance with legal principles, stating, “It is settled law that seized vehicles can be confiscated by the Trial Court only upon conclusion of the trial, when the accused is either convicted, acquitted, or discharged.”

Referring to its recent judgment in Bishwajit Dey vs. The State of Assam (Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2025), the Court observed, “There is no specific bar/restriction under the NDPS Act against the interim release of any seized vehicle.”

Issuing a specific directive, the Court stated, “Since the respondent-State is unable to provide a definitive timeline for the conclusion of the trial against the fifth accused, this Court directs the Trial Court to release the vehicle in question after preparing video and still photographs, subject to the appellant furnishing a surety bond of Rs. 2,10,000/- in place of Rs. 6,00,000/-.”

The Court further remarked that it would be unfair to compel the appellant to retain ownership of the vehicle until the conclusion of the trial. Therefore, it clarified that there shall be no restriction on the sale or transfer of the vehicle. However, it added that if the Trial Court ultimately orders confiscation of the appellant’s vehicle, the appellant shall be liable to pay Rs. 2,10,000/-—the amount the State would have recovered had the vehicle been sold.

Appearing for the appellant was Ms. Paromita Majumdar, Advocate-on-Record, along with Mr. Pinak Mitra, Mr. Jayant Rao, and Ms. Meenakshi Vimal, Advocates. On behalf of the State of West Bengal, Mr. Kunal Chatterji, Advocate-on-Record, appeared along with Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee and Mr. Rohit Bansal, Advocates.

Case Title: Tarun Kumar Majhi vs. The State of West Bengal

[Read Order]



Share this article:

About:

Jhanak is a lawyer by profession and legal journalist by passion. She graduated at the top of her cl...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS

sc-hints-at-pan-india-guidelines-on-timeline-to-frame-charges
Trending Judiciary
SC hints at pan-India guidelines on timeline to frame charges

SC mulls pan-India guidelines to curb delays in framing charges; notes cases where charges aren’t framed even after years despite BNSS mandate of 60 days.

30 October, 2025 12:22 PM
limitation-for-continuous-breach-runs-only-till-contract-expiry-kerala-hc-clarifies
Trending Judiciary
Limitation for Continuous Breach Runs Only Till Contract Expiry: Kerala High Court Clarifies [Read Judgment]

Kerala HC clarifies that for continuous breach of contract, limitation under Article 55 starts when breach ceases; once contract ends, breach cannot continue.

30 October, 2025 01:37 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-quashes-uapa-arrests-holds-remand-courts-explanation-cannot-replace-written-grounds-of-arrest
Trending Judiciary
SC Quashes UAPA Arrests, Holds Remand Court’s Explanation Cannot Replace Written Grounds Of Arrest [Read Order]

Supreme Court quashes UAPA arrests, ruling that remand court’s explanation cannot substitute the mandatory written grounds of arrest.

25 October, 2025 11:10 AM
ngt-orders-probe-into-illegal-tree-felling-in-delhis-civil-lines-directs-action-within-three-months
Trending Environment
NGT Orders Probe into Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi’s Civil Lines, Directs Action Within Three Months [Read Order]

NGT directs Tree Officer to probe illegal tree felling in Delhi’s Civil Lines and take action under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994.

25 October, 2025 11:28 AM
gauhati-hc-quashes-fir-against-cnn-news18-anchor-akansha-swarup-over-kamakhya-temple-remarks
Trending CelebStreet
Gauhati HC Quashes FIR Against CNN-News18 Anchor Akansha Swarup Over Kamakhya Temple Remarks [Read Order]

Gauhati HC quashes FIR against CNN-News18 anchor Akansha Swarup, ruling her Kamakhya Temple remarks were careless but lacked malicious intent.

25 October, 2025 11:43 AM
delhi-hc-upholds-divorce-on-cruelty-grounds-denies-alimony-to-financially-independent-wife
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Upholds Divorce On Cruelty Grounds, Denies Alimony To Financially Independent Wife [Read Judgment]

Delhi HC upholds divorce on cruelty grounds, denies alimony to IRTS officer wife, ruling that alimony is for need-based justice, not enrichment.

25 October, 2025 12:10 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email