Gujarat HC Orders Interim Release Of Seized Ertiga, Citing SC Ruling That Prohibition Act Confiscation Is No Absolute Bar

The petitioner sought interim release of a Maruti Ertiga seized after police allegedly found it carrying contraband without a pass or permit, resulting in an FIR under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The petitioner invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Respondent No. 3 did not oppose release; the State objected by reference to the Act’s confiscation provisions.

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 BNSS (corresponding to Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) permits a court to make appropriate orders for the custody of property pending trial.

In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the Supreme Court held that seized vehicles should not be left to deteriorate in police stations and may be released on suitable bonds, guarantees, and security.

The Court also relied on Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, where a vehicle was released under Articles 226 and 227, and M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, which held that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not absolutely bar interim release of a seized vehicle pending trial.

The Court considered that Respondent No. 3 had no objection and that, although the State relied on the confiscation provisions, it did not dispute the High Court’s power to order release.

Applying the principles in Sunderbhai and M/s ABC Express, the Court concluded that the possibility of confiscation did not operate as an absolute bar to interim custody.

It allowed release subject to safeguards intended to secure the vehicle’s value, prevent its transfer, and ensure its production for trial.

The Court further directed that the vehicle be confiscated in the event of a subsequent offence; that police photograph it and prepare a panchnama at the petitioner’s cost; and that the order be sent to the RTO for recording the transfer restriction, subject to any later order of the Trial Court.