Gujarat HC Orders Conditional Release Of Seized Innova, Citing SC Ruling That Gujarat Prohibition Act Is No Absolute Bar To Interim Custody

Police seized the registered owner’s Toyota Innova Crysta in connection with an FIR registered at Shamlaji Police Station for offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The petitioner’s applications for release of the vehicle before the lower courts were rejected.

The petitioner sought its release, submitting that continued detention risked deterioration and producing the financier’s no-objection certificate.

The State objected by reference to the Act’s confiscation provisions but did not dispute the High Court’s power to order release.

The Court invoked its constitutional jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 and referred to Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerning interim custody of property.

Relying on Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638, it noted that seized vehicles should not be left to deteriorate and may be handed over on appropriate bonds, guarantees, or security, subject to their return when required.

It also relied on M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, for the proposition that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, is not an absolute bar to interim release and that a court may order proper custody under Section 451 CrPC, corresponding to Section 497 BNSS.

The Court also referred to the coordinate Bench decision in Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, SCR.A/7190/2017, which had ordered release in similar circumstances.

The vehicle was registered to the petitioner and had been seized in connection with the FIR; keeping it at the police station risked deterioration.

The financier had no objection to release, and the State’s reliance on the confiscation provisions did not establish an absolute bar to interim custody.

Applying the cited authorities, the Court concluded that release was appropriate, provided safeguards ensured the vehicle’s value and availability for trial.

The Court further directed the police to photograph the vehicle and prepare a panchnama before release, with both included in the charge-sheet papers; the RTO was to be notified of the restraint on transfer, subject to any later order of the Trial Court.