ORDER : The revision on hand is filed against the order directing confiscation of vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-50/F-2542, allegedly involved in transportation of 9.800 Kilograms of ganja from Kodungalloor to Ernakulam. According to the prosecution, the vehicle was seized by the Sub Inspector of Police during the course of transportation of ganja in it from Kodungalloor to Ernakulam. The vehicle and ganja were seized by Inspector of Police of North Paravur Police Station and produced before the Court of Sessions, Ernkaulam. 2. The registered owner of the vehicle has filed an application before the Court seeking for it's interim custody under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The court ordered for its interim release by Annexure-A order subject to execution of a bond for Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to it's satisfaction. In Annexure-A order, the court has also incorporated terms directing the petitioner to produce the vehicle before the court during the course of enquiry, trial or confiscation proceedings as and when required by it, not to sell or otherwise transfer the vehicle in favour of the third party without the permission of the court, not to cause any change so as to make the vehicle unidentifiable and not to use the vehicle in any similar offence. The photograph of the vehicle was also ordered to be taken before releasing the same to the petitioner, in interim custody. 3. The sole accused involved in the case registered on the files of Additional District and Sessions Judge, North Paravur as S.C No.1104/2018 was tried for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) B of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the N.D.P.S Act'). The court has directed by order dated 13.05.2019 for production of the vehicle before it prior to commencement of trial. Accordingly, on 14.05.2019, the vehicle was produced by the petitioner as directed by the court and it was given in safe custody of the Station House Officer, North Paravur. 4. The copy of the judgment is produced alongwith the petition on hand as Annexure-B. In the concluding part of Annexure-B, it is stated: “The Car is to be given custody of the official for confiscation purpose as it is proved that the ganja is seized from the Car.” 5. 4. The copy of the judgment is produced alongwith the petition on hand as Annexure-B. In the concluding part of Annexure-B, it is stated: “The Car is to be given custody of the official for confiscation purpose as it is proved that the ganja is seized from the Car.” 5. The Seizure of Ganja from the vehicle was proved during trial but the accused was acquitted purely on benefit of doubt. There is no whisper in Annexure B that the registered owner was heard prior to granting the vehicle in the custody of the official for confiscation purpose. Therefore, circumstances exist to indicate that vehicle was given in custody of the officials for confiscation purpose without granting the registered owner of the same an opportunity of being heard. 6. It is envisaged under Section 60 of the N.D.P.S Act that a conveyance used in carrying any Narcotic Drug or Psychotropic substance or controlled substance or any article liable to confiscation under Sub-section (1) or Sub-Section (2) of Section 60 shall be liable for confiscation. It is provided under Sub-section (3) of Section 60 that the aforesaid properties are liable for confiscation unless the owner of the animal or conveyance proves that it was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any, and the person-in-charge of the animal or conveyance and that each of them had taken all reasonable precautions against such use. Therefore, the power granted under Section 60 for confiscation is subject to the explanation furnished by the owner of the conveyance (in the case on hand) regarding his knowledge about use of the vehicle or his connivance. So, it is evident that the owner of the vehicle or his agent or any person in charge of the same at the relevant time of commission of the offence must be given an opportunity to explain about his knowledge or connivance regarding the commission of the offence or regarding the involvement of the vehicle in the commission of the offence. 7. Section 63 of the N.D.P.S Act provides for the procedure in making confiscations. 7. Section 63 of the N.D.P.S Act provides for the procedure in making confiscations. It provides that, even in the trial of offences under the Act, if the accused is convicted, acquitted or discharged, the court shall decide whether any article or thing involved in the case and seized by the Investigating Officials is liable to confiscation under Section 60, or Section 61 or Section 62 and if it decides that the article is so liable, it may order confiscation accordingly. 8. Therefore, the power to confiscate is conferred on the court, which is holding trial in the case but before taking a view as to the involvement of the vehicle and prior to directing confiscation of the vehicle, the registered owner of the vehicle ought to have been heard by the trial court. 9. It is clear from Annexure-B judgment that the trial court has ordered for confiscation of vehicle with a one lined order as stated supra without granting any opportunity to the petitioner of being heard and without stating anything about the explanation furnished by the registered owner/petitioner. Therefore, the confiscation ordered by Annexure-B Judgment by a single lined order as extracted above is liable to be set aside and this Court do so. 10. The trial court shall issue notice to the petitioner herein, the registered owner of the vehicle and shall pass an order of confiscation only after hearing the registered owner of the vehicle regarding his knowledge or connivance in the transportation of ganja using the vehicle owned by him. With observations, as above Crl.R.P stands disposed of.