Authority: Gauhati High Court (Kohima Bench)

Order Date: 03.09.2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Petitioner – Mr. Ramjan Ali, S/O Mannan Ali, residing at Lake View Colony, Dimapur, Nagaland; Respondent – The State of Nagaland through the Public Prosecutor.
  • Case No.: Crl. Pet./24/2026.
  • Petition: Under Section 497 of the BNSS read with Sections 438 and 528 of the BNSS, seeking release of seized vehicle Xylo (Diamond White), Registration No. NL 07H 6998, Chassis No. MA1PT2MLXH2K40, Engine No. MLH4K18107.
  • Seizure Details: On 05.05.2026, Narcotic Police intercepted the vehicle at Phesama Village, New Reserve area, based on intelligence about narcotics transport from Manipur to Nagaland. A search uncovered 30 soap cases containing suspected heroin concealed in a modified fuel tank. The seizure was recorded under Special Case No. 09/2025, invoking Sections 21(c) and 60 of the NDPS Act read with Section 61 of the BNS.
  • Ownership Claim: Petitioner asserted he is the registered owner, having purchased the vehicle on an EMI basis financed by Shriram Finance, Bokajan, Assam, and that the vehicle was hypothecated to the lender.
  • Power of Attorney: On 23.09.2024, Petitioner executed POA No. 293/2024 in favour of Mr. Habibur Rahman, authorising Rahman to manage, use, and pay EMIs (Rs 17,300 per month) for the vehicle, with the condition that ownership would transfer to Rahman after full EMI payment. The POA also granted Rahman authority to handle all legal and maintenance matters concerning the vehicle.
  • Prior Application: Petitioner filed Zimma Application No. 255/2025 before the Special NDPS Judge for release of the vehicle. The Trial Court dismissed it on 04.02.2026, noting the vehicle’s structural modification for contraband transport and the seriousness of the offence.
  • Current Situation: The POA holder, Habibur Rahman, is presently untraceable and absconding. Shriram Finance issued a notice on 02.05.2026 demanding outstanding dues of Rs 1,39,595.17.
  • Public Prosecutor’s Position: The prosecutor submitted that the petitioner had sold the vehicle to Habibur Rahman in September 2024, and that Rahman was the actual possessor and de‑facto owner at the time of the offence. Rahman allegedly arranged the fuel‑tank modification and used the vehicle to transport heroin. The prosecutor argued that releasing the vehicle would risk tampering and impede investigation, and sought confiscation of the vehicle.
  • Legal Precedent Cited: Counsel for the petitioner relied on Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat [(2002) 10 SCC 283], wherein the Supreme Court held that seized vehicles should not be retained indefinitely and that appropriate bonds may be required for their return.

Final Outcome

  • The Court, after reviewing pleadings, statements, and the POA, concluded that the petitioner is no longer the legal owner; Habibur Rahman, who remains absconding, was in possession of the vehicle at the time of seizure and is the real owner.
  • Considering the vehicle’s involvement in a serious narcotics offence, its structural modification, and the risk of evidence tampering, the Court held that releasing the vehicle at this stage would hamper the investigation.
  • Consequently, the petition for release of the seized vehicle is dismissed.

Topics: Legal Dispute – Vehicle Seizure, Narcotics Investigation