Gujarat HC Orders Conditional Return Of Pulsar Seized In Liquor Case, Applying SC Ruling That Gujarat Prohibition Act Doesn’t Bar Interim Release

Police intercepted a Pulsar motorcycle, registration No. GJ-27-DF-2157, after receiving secret information that it was carrying liquor. The driver was allegedly found carrying liquor without a pass or permit, and an FIR was registered at Chithoda Police Station under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The petitioner sought release of the motorcycle, relying on the Court’s powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed release by reference to the Prohibition Act’s confiscation provisions, while accepting that the Court could order release in an appropriate case.

Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution empower the High Court to order release of seized property in an appropriate case.

Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) permits orders for proper custody of property pending trial.

In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the Supreme Court held that seized vehicles should not be left unused to deteriorate at police stations and may be released on appropriate bonds, guarantees and security, including while an application for return is pending.

The Court also relied on M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, which held that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 is not an absolute bar to interim release of a seized vehicle and that a court may make an appropriate custody order under Section 451 CrPC.

It also referred to the coordinate Bench decision in Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, SCR.A/7190/2017, in which a vehicle was released under Articles 226 and 227.

The Court considered the State’s objection based on the Prohibition Act’s confiscation provisions but applied M/s ABC Express to conclude that those provisions did not create an absolute bar to interim release.

Having regard to the risk of seized vehicles deteriorating while retained by police, as recognised in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai, and the availability of protective conditions, the Court ordered release of the motorcycle subject to security, restrictions on transfer, and an obligation to produce it when required.

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

Before release, police were directed to photograph the vehicle from all sides at the petitioner’s cost and prepare a panchnama for inclusion with the charge-sheet papers.

A copy of the order was to be sent to the relevant RTO to record the restraint on transfer, subject to any later order of the Trial Court permitting transfer.

Rule was made absolute.