Kerala High Court
Najeeb vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:86635
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 22ND KARTHIKA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025
CRIME NO.571/2025 OF Kozhinjampara Police Station, Palakkad
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.11.2025 IN CRMP NO.5770
OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT / RENT CONTROL
APPELLATE AUTHORITY , PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/S:
NAJEEB
AGED 38 YEARS
CHOLLAPPURAM HOUSE, VETTICHIRA, KARIPPOL POST,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676552
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH
SRI.LIBIN STANLEY
SMT.SAIPOOJA
SRI.SADIK ISMAYIL
SMT.R.GAYATHRI
SRI.M.MAHIN HAMZA
SHRI.ALWIN JOSEPH
SHRI.BENSON AMBROSE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KOZHINJAMPARA POLICE STATION, KOZHINJAMPARA P.O.,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT,, PIN - 678555
CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:86635
OTHER PRESENT:
SR PP SMT SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.11.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:86635
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 10191 OF 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of November, 2025
ORDER
The petitioner is the owner of a vehicle bearing registration No.KL 11 BB 1767, which was seized by the Investigating Officer in Crime No.571/2025 of the Kozhinjampara Police Station, Palakkad for allegedly being involved in an offence punishable under Sections 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act', in short).
2. Claiming interim custody of the vehicle, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.5770/2025 before the Court of Session, Palakkad (Trial Court). By Annexure 2 order, the Trial Court allowed the application, but has directed that the petitioner should furnish bank guarantee for Rs.50,000/-. The said condition is onerous and unjustifiable. Hence, the said condition in Annexure 2 order may be set aside.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:86635
4. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner's vehicle was seized by the Investigating Officer for allegedly being involved in the above crime, which is registered under the NDPS Act. Under Section 60(3) of the NDPS Act, any conveyance that has been used for carrying any narcotic drug, psychotropic substance or controlled substance is liable for confiscation.
5. Interpreting Section 60(3) of the Act, in Thausif Ahammed Bengre v. State of Kerala (2018 (1) KHC 598), this Court has succinctly held that a vehicle can be confiscated only if it is established by the prosecution that the vehicle was used for carrying the narcotic drug, psychotropic substance or controlled substance, that too without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself or his agent.
6. Recently, in Denash v. The State of Tamil Nadu (2025 INSC 1258), the Honourable Supreme Court has held that there is no prohibition to release a conveyance to its owner, on interim custody, if the owner has no culpability in the crime.
7. In the case at hand, the investigation is in progress. CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:86635 The NDPS Act does not insist for cash/bank security to grant interim custody of vehicles, unlike the Abkari Act or the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001.
8. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the definite view that the direction to the petitioner to furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.50,000/- is onerous and unjustifiable, and is liable to be interfered by this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS. However, the petitioner and two solvent sureties shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, to ensure the compliance of the other conditions in Annexure-2 order.
Accordingly, I allow the Crl.M.C. by setting aside the condition in Annexure-2 order, ordering the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee for Rs.50,000/-, and permitting the petitioner to execute a bond with two solvent sureties for Rs.50,000/- in favour of the jurisdictional court and specifically undertaking that he shall not alienate/ transfer the vehicle and he shall produce the vehicle before the Trial Court as and when directed. This order shall be read in conjunction with CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:86635 Annexure-2 order except for the condition regarding furnishing of bank guarantee. It is also clarified that this order shall not preclude the competent authority from proceeding with the confiscation proceedings in accordance with law.
sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rkc/13.11.25 CRL.MC NO. 10191 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:86635 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10191/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 571 OF 2025 OF KOZHINJAMPARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 04.11.2025 IN CRL.M.P. NO. 5770/2025 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE COURT OF SESSIONS; PALAKKAD DIVISION Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.10.2025 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 8881/2025 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT