Can Special Courts Under the NDPS Act Grant Interim Release of Seized Conveyances Despite the 2022 NDPS Rules?

Summary

Practical Impact

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

• The NDPS Rules, 2022 cannot oust the Special Courts’ powers under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC (BNSS) to grant interim custody of seized vehicles.
• Sections 60(3) and 63 of the NDPS Act mandate a hearing before confiscation and safeguard bona fide owners unaware of contraband.
• Even if a conveyance is technically liable for confiscation, interim release can be granted subject to superdari and conditions.
• Supreme Court reaffirms that subordinate rules must conform to the parent legislation and cannot curtail judicial discretion.
• Transporters and third-party owners can invoke this authority to counter administrative interpretations limiting relief.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

1. Subordinate Rules vs. Parent Act: The 2022 Rules cannot override Sections 60(3) and 63 of the NDPS Act, which vest adjudicatory power in the Special Court.
2. Scope of the 2022 Rules
   • Rule 17: Only police officers can initiate disposal post chemical analysis.
   • Rule 22: Drug Disposal Committee “may” order disposal of conveyances up to Rs 50 lakhs—directory, not mandatory.
3. Statutory Safeguards
   • Section 60(3) NDPS Act: Conveyance liable only if owner fails to prove lack of knowledge/connivance with due precautions.
   • Section 63 NDPS Act: Special Court must hear ownership claims prior to confiscation.
4. Interim Release Powers
   • Sections 451 & 457 CrPC (497 & 503 BNSS) apply to Special Courts unless expressly inconsistent; no bar in the NDPS Act.
5. Precedent Alignment: Follows Bishwajit Dey, permitting interim release on superdari where owners/agents lack knowledge or connivance.
6. Harmonious Interpretation: A restrictive reading of the Rules would defeat legislative intent to protect innocent owners and ensure natural justice.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner (Appellant)

• Relied on Bishwajit Dey to assert right to interim release on superdari.
• Argued that the 2022 Rules do not curtail Special Court’s jurisdiction under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC (BNSS).

Respondent (State)

• Claimed Bishwajit Dey was per incuriam for not considering the 2022 Rules.
• Asserted the Drug Disposal Committee alone has authority to dispose of seized conveyances.

Factual Background

The appellant owned and lawfully hired a 14-wheeler lorry to transport 29,400 MT of iron sheets from Chhattisgarh to Tamil Nadu. During transit on 14 July 2024, police intercepted the vehicle and recovered 6 kg ganja hidden by the four drivers, arresting and chargesheeting them under the NDPS Act. The appellant, not an accused, sought interim release of his vehicle from the Special Court, which was denied on the ground of mandatory confiscation under the 2022 Rules. A revision before the Madras High Court was similarly dismissed.

Statutory Analysis

• NDPS Rules, 2022
  • Rule 17: Disposal process initiated by police officer after chemical analysis.
  • Rule 22: Drug Disposal Committee may order disposal of conveyances (value ≤ Rs 50 lakhs).
• NDPS Act
  • Section 60(3): Owner must prove lack of knowledge/connivance and reasonable precautions to avoid confiscation.
  • Section 63: Special Court must hear claimant before ordering confiscation; may sell perishable items.
• CrPC/BNSS
  • Sections 451 & 457 CrPC (497 & 503 BNSS): Courts may grant interim custody (superdari) of seized property pending trial; applicable unless inconsistent with NDPS Act.

Procedural Innovations

• Reaffirmation that Special Courts retain interim release jurisdiction under CrPC/BNSS despite subsequent NDPS Rules.
• Clarifies interplay between administrative disposal rules and judicial safeguards for property rights.

Alert Indicators

• ✔ Precedent Followed