Gujarat High CourtCriminal Procedure and EvidenceCriminal Law

Gujarat HC Orders Release Of Seized Liquor-Case Motorcycle On Surety, Applying SC Ruling That Prohibition Act Is No Absolute Bar To Interim Release

RUDABHAI KARMANBHAI ULVAv.STATE OF GUJARAT

Gujarat HC Orders Release Of Seized Liquor-Case Motorcycle On Surety, Applying SC Ruling That Prohibition Act Is No Absolute Bar To Interim Release. RUDABHAI KARMANBHAI ULVA vs STATE OF GUJARAT. Gujarat High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the seized motorcycle could be released on interim custody despite the confiscation provisions of the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and directed release of the motorcycle on the stated conditions: the petitioner must furnish a solvent surety equivalent to the vehicle’s price stated in the FIR, undertake not to transfer it until final disposal of the trial, and produce it as directed; the order further provided for confiscation in the event of a subsequent offence.

It also directed

Before release, police must photograph the vehicle from all sides and prepare a panchanama, both to form part of 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.

01Facts

Police intercepted the petitioner’s motorcycle, registration No. GJ-25-AE-9208, on information that it was carrying liquor.

pp. 1–2 · ¶ 2

The driver was allegedly found carrying liquor without a pass or permit, leading to registration of an FIR under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

pp. 1–2 · ¶ 2

The petitioner sought release of the motorcycle, invoking Articles 226, 14 and 19 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

pp. 1–2 · ¶ 2

The State objected by reference to the Act’s confiscation provisions but accepted that the Court could order release under Article 226.

p. 2 · ¶ 5

02Issues

i.Whether the seized motorcycle could be released on interim custody despite the confiscation provisions of the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

p. 2, 4 · ¶ 5, 8

ii.If so, what terms and safeguards should govern its release.

pp. 3–5 · ¶ 7, 10–12

03Law Applied

Section 497 of the BNSS, corresponding to Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, empowers the Court to make appropriate orders for the custody of property pending trial.

p. 4 · ¶ 8

The Court relied on Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, which cautioned against keeping seized vehicles unused at police stations and supported their interim release on appropriate bonds, guarantees and security.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 7

It also relied on M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, for the rule that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, is not an absolute bar to interim release of a seized vehicle pending trial.

p. 4 · ¶ 8

The Court also noted the coordinate Bench’s decision in Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, SCR.A/7190/2017, releasing a vehicle under Articles 226 and 227.

p. 3 · ¶ 6

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

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 451

Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949. Section 98

04Reasoning

The Court considered that the motorcycle had been seized in a prohibition offence, but concluded that the confiscation provisions did not prevent interim release.

pp. 3–4 · ¶ 7–10

Applying the principles in Sunderbhai and M/s ABC Express, it found that the vehicle could be released subject to safeguards ensuring its preservation and availability for trial.

pp. 3–4 · ¶ 7–10

Those safeguards included security equivalent to the vehicle’s price stated in the FIR, an undertaking not to transfer it, and an obligation to produce it when directed.

pp. 3–4 · ¶ 7–10

05Holding

The Court allowed the petition and directed release of the motorcycle on the stated conditions: the petitioner must furnish a solvent surety equivalent to the vehicle’s price stated in the FIR, undertake not to transfer it until final disposal of the trial, and produce it as directed; the order further provided for confiscation in the event of a subsequent offence.

p. 4 · ¶ 10

Before release, police must photograph the vehicle from all sides and prepare a panchanama, both to form part of the charge-sheet papers.

p. 5 · ¶ 11

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.

p. 5 · ¶ 12

Rule was made absolute.

p. 5 · ¶ 13
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

RUDABHAI KARMANBHAI ULVAvsSTATE OF GUJARAT

Gujarat High Court · October 28, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment