Gujarat HC Orders Interim Release Of Owner’s Car Seized In Liquor Case, Applying SC Ruling That Prohibition Act Is No Absolute Bar

In brief

The question

1. Whether the High Court could order interim release of a vehicle seized in a Gujarat Prohibition Act case, notwithstanding the Act’s confiscation provisions.

The court held

The petition was allowed.

It also directed

The Court directed release of the vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing solvent surety equal to its value stated in the FIR, undertaking not to transfer it until conclusion of the trial, and agreeing to produce it when directed; it further ordered 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 and prepare a panchnama, both to form part of the charge-sheet papers.

The order was to be sent to the concerned RTO to record the restraint on transfer, subject to any later order of the trial court.

01Facts

Police seized the petitioner’s Renault Triber motor car, registration No. GJ-34-H-5485, after allegedly finding its driver carrying liquor without a pass or permit.

p. 1

An FIR was registered at Vartej Police Station, Bhavnagar, under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

p. 1

The petitioner’s application for release of the vehicle was rejected by the A.C.J.M. on 11 May 2026, and her revision was dismissed on 1 July 2026.

pp. 1–3

She sought release before the High Court, submitting that the vehicle risked deterioration while in police custody and producing an NOC from HDFC Bank, which held a hypothecation over it

pp. 1–3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the High Court could order interim release of a vehicle seized in a Gujarat Prohibition Act case, notwithstanding the Act’s confiscation provisions.

pp. 3–5

ii.2. Whether the vehicle should be released to the petitioner subject to conditions securing its preservation and production during the proceedings.

pp. 2–5

03Law Applied

Article 226 of the Constitution empowers the High Court to order release of seized property in an appropriate case.

pp. 1, 3–4

Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerns custody and disposal of property pending trial; the Court referred to its CrPC counterpart, Section 451, in discussing interim custody.

pp. 1, 4–5

In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638, the Supreme Court held that seized vehicles should not be left to deteriorate in police stations and may be handed over on suitable bond, guarantee and security.

p. 4

The Court also relied on Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, SCR.A/7190/2017, and M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885; the latter held that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not impose an absolute bar on interim release of a seized vehicle pending trial.

pp. 3–5

Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497

Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949. Section 98

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 451

04Reasoning

The petitioner was the vehicle’s registered owner, and the vehicle was at risk of deterioration if retained in police custody.

pp. 2–3, 5

Applying Sunderbhai and the cited authorities, the Court found that the Prohibition Act’s confiscation provisions did not prevent interim release and that the vehicle could be preserved as evidence through photographs and a panchnama, while its availability could be secured by conditions imposed on the petitioner.

pp. 3–5