01Facts
The petitioner sought release of his Mahindra and Mahindra Dalu, registration No. GJ-27-TT-5975, seized in connection with an FIR alleging transportation of liquor without a pass or permit, under Sections 65-A, 65(e), 116-B, 98(2), 81 and 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949.
p. 1The Magistrate rejected his release application, and the Sessions Court dismissed his revision.
p. 2The petitioner relied on the risk that the vehicle would deteriorate while in police custody and produced a bank NOC for its release.
p. 2He then invoked Articles 21 and 226 of the Constitution and Sections 497 and 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
p. 102Issues
i.1. Whether the High Court could order interim release of a vehicle seized in a Gujarat Prohibition Act case notwithstanding the confiscation provision in Section 98(2).
pp. 2–4ii.2. Whether the vehicle should be released to the petitioner subject to safeguards for its production and preservation pending trial.
pp. 3–503Law Applied
Article 226 of the Constitution empowers the High Court to grant appropriate relief, including release of seized property.
p. 1 · pp. 3–4Section 497 of the BNSS provides for orders concerning the custody and disposal of property pending trial, while Section 528 preserves the High Court’s inherent powers.
p. 1Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not impose an absolute bar on interim release of a seized vehicle pending trial; as noted by the Court, M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, recognised the court’s power under Section 451 of the CrPC, corresponding to Section 497 of the BNSS, to make appropriate custody orders.
p. 4In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638, the Supreme Court advised against leaving seized vehicles unused in police stations and supported their release on suitable bonds, guarantees and security.
pp. 3–4The Court also relied on the coordinate bench decision in Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, SCR.A/7190/2017.
p. 3Provisions in the judgment · 7 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497Section 528
Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949. Section 65Section 98Section 81Section 83
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 451
04Reasoning
The vehicle was registered in the petitioner’s name, and the bank had issued an NOC for its release.
p. 2Applying Sunderbhai and the cited decisions, the Court concluded that the vehicle need not remain in police custody and deteriorate while the case was pending; Section 98(2) did not prevent interim release.
pp. 3–4The Court therefore considered release appropriate, subject to conditions securing the vehicle’s value and ensuring that it remained available to the trial court.
p. 505Holding
The petition was allowed, and the concerned trial court or authority was directed to release the vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing solvent surety equivalent to the vehicle’s price stated in the FIR, undertaking not to transfer it until final disposal of the trial, and agreeing to produce it when directed; the order further provided for confiscation if a subsequent offence occurred.
p. 5Before release, police were directed to photograph the vehicle and prepare a panchanama at the petitioner’s cost, with both included in the charge-sheet papers.
p. 5A copy of the order was to be sent to the RTO for the necessary register entry and notice of the restraint on transfer, subject to any later trial-court order permitting transfer.
p. 5Original Court PDF
VIKRAMBHAI KHEMRAJBHAI DESAIvsSTATE OF GUJARAT
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
