Gujarat HC Releases Motorcycle Seized In Liquor Case, Citing SC Ruling That Prohibition Act Doesn’t Automatically Bar Interim Custody

Police seized the petitioner’s Suzuki Avenis motorcycle, registration No. GJ-04-EQ-0574, after allegedly finding its driver transporting liquor without a pass or permit.

An FIR was registered at Mahuva Police Station, Bhavnagar, under the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The petitioner sought release of the motorcycle. The State objected by reference to the Act’s confiscation provisions, while accepting that the High Court could order release in an appropriate case.

The petitioner was the registered owner of the seized motorcycle.

Articles 21 and 226 of the Constitution, and Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, were invoked in seeking release and interim custody of the seized vehicle.

In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 638, the Supreme Court held that seized vehicles should not be left unused at police stations and may be handed over on appropriate bonds, guarantees and security, with provision for their return when required.

The Court also relied on M/s ABC Express v. State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 885, which held that Section 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act does not create an absolute bar to interim release of a seized vehicle and that a court may order proper custody under Section 451 CrPC, corresponding to Section 497 BNSS.

A coordinate Bench had likewise ordered release in an analogous matter under Articles 226 and 227.

Applying Sunderbhai and the principle stated in M/s ABC Express, the Court concluded that the prohibition-law confiscation provisions did not, by themselves, prevent interim release; appropriate safeguards could protect the vehicle’s availability and preserve evidence for trial.

It therefore ordered release subject to a solvent surety equal to the vehicle’s price stated in the FIR, an undertaking not to transfer it pending trial, and an obligation to produce it when directed.

The Court also required photographs and a panchnama before release, and directed that these be included with the charge-sheet papers.

The police were directed to photograph the vehicle and prepare a panchnama before release; the RTO was to be notified of the restraint on transfer pending trial, subject to any contrary order of the trial court.

Rule was made absolute.