Gujarat HC Releases Auto-Rickshaw Seized In Liquor Case, Citing SC Ruling That Prohibition Act’s Section 98(2) Is No Absolute Bar To Interim Custody

The petitioner sought interim release of an auto-rickshaw, registration No. GJ-03-BX-6889, seized after police allegedly found its driver carrying liquor without a pass or permit.

An FIR was registered 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, seeking release of the vehicle.

The State objected by reference to the Act’s confiscation provisions but accepted that the High Court could direct release in an appropriate case.

Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution empower the High Court to grant appropriate relief, including interim release of seized property.

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

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 and may be handed over on appropriate bonds, guarantees, and security.

The judgment also relied on M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, for the proposition that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, is not an absolute bar to interim release and does not prevent a court from exercising its custody powers under Section 451 CrPC.

The Court also noted 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 applied the principles in Sunderbhai and M/s ABC Express to conclude that the confiscation provisions did not create an absolute prohibition on interim release of the vehicle.

Given the High Court’s constitutional powers and the court’s authority to regulate interim custody, the vehicle could be released subject to safeguards designed to preserve its availability and prevent its transfer pending trial.

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

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

A copy of the order must be sent to the concerned RTO to record the restraint on transfer, subject to any later order of the trial court permitting transfer.

Rule was made absolute.