the Supreme Court ruled that an innocent vehicle owner unaware of its use in a crime can receive temporary custody,
In *Allah Ditta vs. The State* (2010 SCMR 1181), the Supreme Court ruled that an innocent vehicle owner unaware of its use in a crime can receive temporary custody, as "any private individual" in Section 74 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, refers only to those connected to the crime or accused. The unique point decided in the case of *Allah Ditta vs. The State* (2010 SCMR 1181) by the Supreme Court of Pakistan was the interpretation of the term "any private individual" in Section 74 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, specifically regarding the temporary custody of a vehicle used in the commission of a crime involving narcotics. The Court concluded that the phrase "any private individual" should be read ejusdem generis with the preceding specific words, "accused, or his associate or relative." This means that the "private individual" mentioned in the proviso refers to someone who has some nexus with the offe