Gujarat HC Orders Conditional Release Of Truck Seized With Alleged Contraband, Applying SC Ruling That Prohibition Act Does Not Bar Interim Custody

Police intercepted the petitioner’s Ashok Leyland truck, registration No. GJ-03-BW-8487, on secret information and allegedly found it carrying contraband without a pass or permit.

An FIR was registered at Airport Police Station, Rajkot, for an offence under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The petitioner sought release of the truck, relying on the Court’s powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

The State opposed release in view of the Act’s confiscation provisions but accepted that the High Court could order release under Article 226.

Article 226 of the Constitution empowers the High Court to order release of seized property in an appropriate case; the Court also referred to its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 and its power under Section 497 of the BNSS.

In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the Supreme Court held that seized vehicles should not be left unused to deteriorate and may be handed over on appropriate bonds, guarantees and security, subject to production when required.

The Court relied on M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat for the proposition that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not impose an absolute bar on interim release of a vehicle, and that a court may make an appropriate custody order under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 497 of the BNSS.

It also referred to the coordinate Bench decision in Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, in which a vehicle was released under Articles 226 and 227.

The truck had been seized in a prohibition-offence investigation, but the confiscation provisions did not, in light of M/s ABC Express, create an absolute impediment to interim custody.

Leaving the vehicle at the police station risked its deterioration, the concern identified in Sunderbhai.

The Court therefore ordered release subject to safeguards securing the vehicle’s value, preventing its transfer, and ensuring its production when required.

It further directed the police to photograph the vehicle and prepare a panchnama, and the RTO to record the restriction on transfer.

The order further stated that the vehicle would stand confiscated in the event of a subsequent offence.

Before release, the police were directed to photograph the vehicle and prepare a panchnama for inclusion with the charge-sheet papers; the order was also to be sent to the RTO to record the restriction on transfer.

Rule was made absolute.