JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. 1. The accused/respondents herein allegedly committed offences punishable under Section 25-A and 27-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ?Act?). During the pendency of the trial before the learned trial Court, an application stood moved there before under Section 457/451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the respondents/accused where within they claimed release of medicines as stood seized besides were taken into possession by the petitioner herein while raiding the factory premises of the respondents/accused. The application was allowed by the learned trial Court, whereby it ordered for the release vis-a-vis the respondents/accused, the medicines/drugs as stood taken into possession by the Intelligence Officer from the factory premises of the respondents/accused. 2. The learned counsel appearing on either sides have been heard at length. The relevant seizure made by the Intelligence Officer from the premises of the accused/respondents, constituted the ?case property? also with respect thereto offences punishable under Section 25-A and 27-A stand constituted against the accused/respondents. Consequently, for proof qua its efficacious seizure by the Intelligence Officer from the factory premises of the respondents/accused on his raiding the factory premises, its production before the learned trial Court was imperative also thereupon the prosecution would hence succeed in proving the charge whereupon the accused/respondents stand tried by the learned trial Court. Given hence the imperativeness of its production by the prosecuting agency before the learned trial Court, it was manifestly in sagacious for the learned trial Court to proceed to order for its release qua the respondents/accused. It appears that the learned trial Court while making its satisfaction qua the imperativeness of its release vis-a-vis the accused/respondents has placed reliance upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in a case titled as Sunderbhat Ambala Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638 yet reliance thereupon by it is grossly inapt as the apposite order recorded therein qua the release of the case property stood rendered vis-a-vis its lawful owner also its hence standing ordered to be released by the Hon'ble Apex Court was subject to imposition of certain conditions upon its lawful owner. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638 yet reliance thereupon by it is grossly inapt as the apposite order recorded therein qua the release of the case property stood rendered vis-a-vis its lawful owner also its hence standing ordered to be released by the Hon'ble Apex Court was subject to imposition of certain conditions upon its lawful owner. Even though the respondents/accused may be the owners of the relevant medicines as stand seized from their factory premises by the Intelligence Officer concerned, nonetheless, theirs prima facie standing held in the relevant factory premises in flagrant transgression of the mandate of the provisions of Section 25-A and 27-A of the Act, prima facie renders the accused/respondents to be amenable to face charge before the learned trial Court for theirs allegedly committing the offences constituted in the aforesaid penal provisions of law. Necessarily for reiteration its production before the learned trial Court by the prosecuting agency is imperative. The learned trial Court while rendering the impugned rendition has misapplied to the factual matrix hereat the ratio decidendi held in the rendition of the Hon'ble Apex Court significantly when gross contradistinctivity occurs in the factual matrix prevailing therein vis-a-vis factual matrix prevailing hereat, contradistinctivity whereof imminently surges forth from the salient fact occurring in the verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court, qua the owner who therein claimed the release of the case property also being the victim of the offence committed qua it, whereas, hereat the owners of the relevant property are not the victims of the offence rather are alleged to commit offences vis-a-vis the relevant case property. The aforesaid marked distinctivity inter se the factual matrix prevalent thereat vis-a-vis the factual matrix prevalent hereat obviously renders it to not hold any clout hereat for thereupon this Court standing constrained to validate the rendition of the learned trial Court nor hence it constitutes the adherable ratio decidendi. Furthermore, given the factum of the relevant drugs/medicines on standing released suffering the fate of theirs/it standing tampered with also theirs hence nullifying the entire exercise of the Intelligence Officer concerned, prods this Court to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, the instant petition is allowed and order impugned hereat is quashed and set aside. Records be sent down forthwith. All pending applications also stand disposed of.