Law: Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930

Section: 33

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 435, 439

(a) Dangerous Drugs Act (II of 1930) S. 33 read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898). Ss. 435 & 439-Revision (criminal)-Confiscation of property, notice for---Notice, held, a mere intimation or information or a warning of proceedings against a party for purpose of preparing or explaining its side of case and contesting on merits- Respondents all along having sufficient notice of proceedings and Act itself making no specific provision for issuing notice before passing order of confiscation of property-Issue of notice, held, could not be pressed into service, in circumstances. Abdul Razzak v. Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 5 ref. (b) Dangerous Drugs Act (II of 1930) S. 33--Confiscation of property-Principles of natural justice, invocation of-Words "liable to confiscation" in S. 33-Do not mean automatic confiscation but vest authorities with a judicial discretion to be exercised upon correct principles of natural justice--Land-Rover being used, as a means to pull trailer in which charas found concealed, both held, constitute one unit for purpose of S. 33 and liable to confiscation.--[Words and phrases Natural justice, principles of], Harry Edwards O'Neil v. State P L D 1975 Kar. 54 ref. Date of hearing: 23rd April, 1979.                                                                                                              JUDGMENT This Revision Application under section 435/439, Cr. P. C. calls in question the order to appeal under section 517/520, Cr. P. C. passed by the learned Sessions Judge Karachi, whereby the Land Rover seized by the applicants was released from confiscation and was ordered to be returned to the respondents. 2. The respondent No. 2 has left the country without giving her contact address to her counsel Mr. Rustam Kaikobad, who had filed an application for dropping her, as a non-contesting party. The application was allowed by this Court, on 17th…