2008 AIR SCW 4868 ::2008 (5) AIR Bom R 306 ::(2008) 3 DLT(CRL) 843 ::(2008) 3 CurCriR 423 ::2009 (2) SCC (Cri) 793 ::2008 (14) SCC 186 ::(2008) 3 Mad LJ(Cri) 418 ::(2008) 10 Scale 383 ::(2008) 2 ALD(CRL) 282 ::2008 (72) ALR SOC 92 (SC) ::(2009) 1 EastCriC 321 ::(2008) 3 Ker LT 400 ::(2008) 2 Orissa LR 393 ::(2008) 68 AllIndCas 12 (SC) ::(2008) 62 AllCriC 686 ::2008 AllMR(CRI) 2306 ::(2008) 2 EFR 493

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Bombay)

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. B. Sinha, V. S. Sirpurkar , JJ

(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (61 of 1985) , S.68H, S.68J— Notice of forfeiture of property - Pre-requirement - Some material indicating direct nexus between property sought to be acquired and properties illegally acquired - Must be available before competent authority. 2003 AIR SCW 3751, Not Followed.Crl. W.P. No. 1095 of 2002, D/-27-11-2002 (Bom.), Reversed. Section 68-H provides for two statutory requirements on the part of the authority viz; (i) he has to form an opinion in regard to his 'reason to believe' and (ii) he must record reasons therefor. Both the statutory elements, namely, 'reason to believe' and 'recording of reasons' must be premised on the materials produced before him. Such materials must have been gathered during the investigation carried out in terms of Section 68-E or otherwise. Indisputably therefore, he must have some materials be fore him. If no such material had been placed before him, he cannot initiate a proceeding. @page-SCW4869 He cannot issue a show cause notice on his own ipse dixit. A roving en quiry is not contemplated under the Act as properties sought to be forfeited must have a direct nexus with the properties illegally acquired. Whenever a statute pro vides for 'reason to believe', either the reasons should appear on the face of the notice or they must be....