Search By Topic: Sapurdari/superdari-cases

1. (SC) 07-01-2025

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 51 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 451, 457 – Return of seized vehicle – Superdari – There is no specific bar/ restriction under the provisions of the NDPS Act for return of any seized vehicle in the interim pending disposal of the criminal case -- In view of Section 51 of NDPS Act, the Court can invoke the general power under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C. for return of the seized vehicle pending final decision of the criminal case -- Trial Court has the discretion to release the vehicle in the interim.

(Para 22, 23)

B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 51, 60 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 451, 457 – Return of seized vehicle – Superdari – Vehicles in police custody are stored in the open -- If the Vehicle is not released during the trial, it will be wasted and suffering the vagaries of the weather, its value will only reduce -- On the contrary, if the Vehicle in question is released, it would be beneficial to the owner (who would be able to earn his livelihood), to the bank/financier (who would be repaid the loan disbursed by it) and to the society at large (as an additional vehicle would be available for transportation of goods) – Appeal allowed, trial Court directed to release the Vehicle in the interim on superdari after preparing a video and still photographs of the vehicle and after obtaining all information/documents necessary for identification of the vehicle, which shall be authenticated by the Investigating Officer, owner of the Vehicle and accused by signing the same – Conditions imposed.

(Para 34-36)

30. (P&H HC) 21-12-2020

A. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (59 of 1960), Sections 11, 59, 60 -- Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (20 of 2015), Sections 5, 13(2), 17(2) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 279, 336 – Smuggling of oxen – Confiscation of vehicle -- Competent Authority is empowered u/s 17(2) of 2015 Act to confiscate the vehicle after being satisfied that such vehicle was used for commission of offence under the Act -- Bare reading of the operative part of the order would make it clear that no such satisfaction has been recorded in the order passed by the SDM -- Such aspect has been overlooked even by the Deputy Commissioner – Impugned orders, as such, cannot sustain.

(Para 9, 10)

B. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (59 of 1960), Sections 11, 59, 60 -- Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (20 of 2015), Sections 5, 13(2), 17(2) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 279, 336 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 451 -- Smuggling of oxen – Confiscation of vehicle -- Release on superdari -- No useful purpose will be served as such to keep the vehicle in question in the police station during pendency of the trial of the FIR -- Vehicle belongs to Uttar Pradesh and in case the same is released, it would be difficult/unlikely to get possession of the same in case the allegations are proved -- Petitioner ready and willing to furnish a security amount of Rs.50,000/- for release of the vehicle in question on superdari -- Petition allowed, vehicle in question ordered to be released on superdari to the petitioner.

(Para 15-19)

33. (P&H HC) 15-10-2020

Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (67 of 1957), Section 21(4), 30 -- Haryana Minor Mineral Concession, Stocking, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of Illegal Mining Rules, 2012, Rule 104, 109 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 379 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 451, 452, 457 -- FIR u/s 379 IPC – Illegal mining -- Confiscation of vehicle – Release of vehicle on superdiginama – Alternative remedy – Plea of -- Vehicle confiscated by the Mining Officer on the strength of the NGT orders without referring to any provision of the Act on the ground that the owner had not come forward to deposit the amount of compensation apart from the fine, royalty and price of mineral -- Orders of the NGT have to be followed by the State but only after following the due procedure prescribed by law as per the provisions of the 1957 Act, as duly amended -- Once the Act itself provides that confiscation is only to be done at the third stage and nothing has been brought to the notice that the vehicle had been seized earlier, the provisions of Rule 104 would come to the help of the petitioner -- Issue of alternate remedy, thus, would not come into play under Rule 109 once the FIR has been lodged and the criminal Court would, thus, be seized of the matter and would have necessary jurisdiction -- Vehicle cannot remain unattended in the police station -- Resultantly, it is directed that the vehicle shall be released on the terms of the superdiginama.

(Para 12-18)