Gujarat HC Orders Release Of Swift Seized In Alleged Liquor Case, Despite Confiscation Clause, On Full-Value Surety and No-Transfer Undertaking

The petitioner sought interim release of a Swift car, registration No. GJ-06-RB-9200, seized after police allegedly found its driver carrying liquor without a pass or permit.

An FIR was registered at Desar Police Station under the Prohibition Act.

The petitioner invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; the prosecution opposed release by reference to the Act’s confiscation provisions.

The petitioner also placed the original NOC on record.

Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the BNSS empower the Court to consider interim custody of seized property.

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

The Court also relied on Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, where vehicle release was ordered under Articles 226 and 227.

As described in the judgment, M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat held that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not impose an absolute bar on interim release of a seized vehicle, and that the Court may order its proper custody under Section 451 CrPC, corresponding to Section 497 BNSS.

The Court considered the prosecution’s reliance on the confiscation provisions but noted that the power to order interim release was not thereby excluded.

Applying the principles against allowing seized vehicles to deteriorate, together with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 98(2), the Court found release appropriate subject to safeguards.

Those safeguards included a solvent surety equal to the vehicle’s price as stated in the FIR, an undertaking not to transfer it pending trial, and an obligation to produce it when directed.

Before release, the police must photograph it from all sides at the petitioner’s cost and prepare a panchnama, with both to form part of the charge-sheet papers.

The order must be sent to the concerned RTO to record the restraint on transfer pending trial, subject to any contrary order of the Trial Court.

The Rule was made absolute.