ORDER : 1. The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 19.03.2016 passed in Special Case No. 17 of 2015(N) titled "State through NCB, Ranchi v. Manga Singh". 2. By the order dated 19.03.2016, the application dated 19.12.2015 filed by the petitioner claiming himself the rightful owner, seeking release of the seized vehicle Bolero bearing Registration No. BR 02 P 8577 was rejected. 3. On the basis of an information and after reducing the same in writing, a surveillance was laid at 22: 15 PM on 06. 10.2015. On the identification of the informer, Mahindra Bolero SLX bearing Registration No. BR 02 P 8577 was stopped and searched. The person boarding the vehicle could not produce any identity proof and therefore a search was conducted. On search of the person, namely, Manga Singh in presence of the Superintendent, NCB, Ranchi a plastic packet in sealed condition, a samsumg mobile phone and Rs.3000/- in cash were recovered. The plastic packet was found containing blackish brawn coloured sticky substance which was tested with the drug detecting kit carried by the NCB team and it disclosed that the substance weighing about 3 kg. was opium. Accordingly, a crime case under section 8 read with section 18(b) of NDPS Act was registered and the article as well as the vehicle was also seized. The petitioner was not initially made an accused. 4. Opposing the application filed by the petitioner seeking release of the vehicle, NCB took a position that inspite of notices issued to him the petitioner did not appear before it and since complicity of the petitioner in the crime was yet to be ascertained the seized vehicle cannot be released at this stage. 5. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now the petitioner has been arrested and he is in custody. 6. Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that when any property is produced before any Criminal Court during any inquiry or trial, the Court may make such order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such property pending conclusion of the inquiry or trial, and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is otherwise expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to be sold or otherwise disposed or. 7. 7. The property in question is not subject to speedy decay though it may be said that in course of time it may suffer natural decay. The property in question is useful to the owner and it may generate financial assistance to the owner and his family. 8. The learned Special Judge in his order dated 19.03.2016 has not adverted to the relevant considerations for release of the vehicle which is seized in relation to a crime. 9. The order dated 19.03.2016 being a cryptic order is therefore set-aside. The matter may be remitted back to the Court concerned for a fresh decision on the application dated 19.12.2015 filed by the petitioner. But, Mr. Rajiv Sinha, the learned ASGI appearing for NCB states that on collecting necessary materials and for good reasons an application for withdrawal of Crime No.04/NCB/RANCHI/2015(02/2015-16) has been filed in the Court below. 10. In view of the aforesaid development, I am of the opinion that the application dated 19.12.2015 can be taken up for hearing in the event the application for withdrawal filed by NCB is not allowed. 11. Criminal Revision No.540 of 2016 is allowed, in the aforesaid terms. 12. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Principal Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi for information.