Gujarat HC Releases Idle Tata Ace Seized Over Prohibited Goods, Citing SC Ruling That Gujarat Prohibition Act Does Not Automatically Bar Interim Release

The petitioner sought release of his Tata Ace BS2 vehicle, registration No. GJ-03-AV-8060, invoking Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

The vehicle had been seized in connection with a Janvajog entry concerning prohibited goods and was idle when seized.

The State opposed release by reference to the confiscation provisions of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, but did not dispute the High Court’s power under Article 226 to order release.

Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution confer the High Court’s constitutional and supervisory powers, while Section 497 of the BNSS provides for orders concerning the custody and disposal of property during an inquiry or trial; the judgment treats it as corresponding to Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Relying on Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638, the Court noted that seized vehicles should not be left to deteriorate at police stations and may be released on appropriate bonds, guarantees, or security.

It also relied on Musa Khan Jat v. State of Gujarat, SCR.A/7190/2017, where a vehicle was released under Articles 226 and 227.

M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, held that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not absolutely bar interim release of a seized vehicle and that the court may make appropriate custody orders.

The Court considered that the vehicle was idle when seized and that the State did not dispute the High Court’s power to order its release.

Applying Sunderbhai and the cited decisions, it held that the confiscation provision did not prevent interim custody where conditions could preserve the vehicle and ensure its production.

It therefore ordered release subject to a solvent surety equivalent to the vehicle’s value, an undertaking not to transfer it pending trial, production when directed, and confiscation in the event of a subsequent offence.

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

The order must be sent to the relevant RTO to record the restraint on transfer, subject to any contrary order by the trial court.

The matter was retained for the limited purpose of obtaining the Investigating Officer’s report regarding the Janvajog entry and was stood over to 7 December 2026.