RAJESH BINDAL,J. - (1.) - The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of order dated 28.6.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed under Section 68F(2) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS Act'), freezing the property mentioned in the order and order dated 27.7.2007 (Annexure P-2), vide which the freezing order was confirmed. Challenge has also been made to order dated 18.11.2013 (Annexure P-5), passed by Appellate Tribunal for forfeited Property, New Delhi, vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of freezing the property was dismissed being barred by limitation as the appeal was filed against the order dated 27.7.2007 freezing the property, on 21.6.2013.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there were three FIRs against the petitioner, as have been mentioned in the order dated 27.7.2007 (Annexure P-2), out of which, in two she was acquitted and in third, she was convicted. The case set up by the State is that the poppy husk was sold by the petitioner and out of the sale proceeds, the house was purchased. In fact, the property was owned by the husband of the petitioner, which was purchased in the year 2003. No notice was issued to the husband of the petitioner, who is the owner of the property. Hence, the order freezing the property of the petitioner deserves to be set aside. In support of his arguments, reliance was placed upon judgment of this Court in Union of India and another v. Gurmail Singh and others 2015 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 323.
(3.) Learned counsel for Union of India submitted that it is not only the petitioner but the entire family of the petitioner is involved in the drug business. The notice was issued to the husband of the petitioner as well, which was duly served upon him on 16.7.2007, however, he did not respond. It was further submitted that though the petitioner has been acquitted in two FIRs, however, she has been convicted in third case. It is so stated in reply to para no. 13(e) of the writ petition to which no replication has been filed by her.;