The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has set aside the confiscation of a Tata Sumo vehicle allegedly used for transporting narcotic substances, holding that the Special Court failed to follow the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act before ordering confiscation.
Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi passed the order while allowing a criminal appeal filed by vehicle owner Neerudi Dhanamma.
The appeal arose from a judgment dated December 8, 2008, passed by the Special Sessions Judge for NDPS cases at Rajahmundry in NDPS Sessions Case No.14 of 2008. The Special Court had directed confiscation of Tata Sumo vehicle bearing registration number AP 04 K 3141 after the trial court found that it had been used for transporting narcotic substances.
Read Also:- Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Man in Wife Burn Death Case Over Contradictory Dying Declarations
Dhanamma, who claimed ownership of the vehicle, challenged the confiscation order before the High Court. She argued that the vehicle had allegedly been used without her knowledge or consent and that she was never given an opportunity to defend herself before the confiscation order was passed.
Her counsel relied on Sections 60 and 63 of the NDPS Act, arguing that the owner must be given an opportunity to establish that the vehicle was used without her knowledge or connivance before confiscation is ordered.
The High Court examined the record and found that the Special Court had not followed the statutory safeguards under the NDPS Act.
Justice Chakravarthi noted that the trial court judgment merely stated that the Tata Sumo used for transportation of narcotic substances should be sold and the sale proceeds confiscated to the State after expiry of the appeal period. However, there was nothing on record to show that notice had been issued to the owner or that she had been allowed to present evidence regarding her alleged lack of knowledge.
Read Also:- MP High Court Clarifies How Retrospective Maintenance Should Be Calculated
The Court observed, “The impugned order indicates that the learned Special Court did not follow any procedure before passing the said order, particularly the procedure prescribed and contemplated under law, i.e., Sections 60 and 63 of the NDPS Act.”
The Additional Public Prosecutor also fairly conceded before the Court that the procedure contemplated under the NDPS Act did not appear to have been followed while ordering confiscation.
Allowing the appeal, the High Court held that the confiscation order was legally unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
The Court remitted the matter back to the Special Court for fresh consideration after giving both the vehicle owner and the State an opportunity to be heard in accordance with Sections 60 and 63 of the NDPS Act.
Since the dispute dated back to 2008, the High Court directed the Special Court to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within three months from receipt of the order.
Case Title: Neerudi Dhanamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2009
Judge: Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi
Decision Date: April 29, 2026
