[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Alpeshbhai Ghanshyambhai Miyani vs State Of Gujarat on 10 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14059/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (POSSESSION OF MUDDAMAL)
NO. 14059 of 2025
==========================================================
ALPESHBHAI GHANSHYAMBHAI MIYANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR K J PANCHAL(2422) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 10/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
RULE. Learned APP waives notice of rule for and on behalf
of the respondents.
1. The petitioner has preferred this petition, seeking to invoke
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 and
supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India so also inherent powers of this Court under Section 497 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short
"BNSS") with a prayer to release Muddamal Vehicle i.e BYD Atto
3, 4-wheeler car bearing RTO registration No.MH-04-MN-2389,
which was seized in connection with the FIR
No.11210063250205 of 2025, registered with Singanpore -
Dabholi Police Station, Surat City for the offence punishable
under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act (for short "NDPS Act").
2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has urged that this
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14059/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025
undefined
Court has wide powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.
3. Learned APP has opposed the present petition on the ground
that the impugned vehicle was used in commission of the offence
of NDPS Act and subsequently was seized. Therefore, the
impugned vehicle is not required to be released and the same is
required to be confiscated. Even the trial Court has relied on the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Bishwajit Dey Vs
State of Assam reported in 2025 INSC 32, and come to the
conclusion that the vehicle is seized in connection with the
offence of NDPS Act and liable to be confiscated in view of bar
under Section 60 and is not required to be released. Hence,
requested to dismiss the petition.
4. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties.
5. Going through the allegations, this Court is of the
considered view that merely because the vehicle is used in the
commission of the offence of NDPS Act, is not a ground to refuse
the application for release of muddamal. At the time of deciding
the application for release of muddamal seized under NDPS Act
which does not bar the jurisdiction under Section 451 of the
Cr.P.C or Section 60 of the NDPS Act. Exercising the power
under Section 60 of the NDPS Act the Court must have to satisfy
that the vehicle was used in the transportation of alleged
contraband and the vehicle was used in transportation either it
was found in conscious possession. As per the case of
prosecution the car was used for transportation of contraband
by the co-accused based on the statement of co-accused but
there is no evidence or material which suggest that from the said
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14059/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025
undefined
vehicle the contraband was seized.
6. Considering the above facts and keeping in mind the law
laid down in the case of Bishwajit Dey Vs State of Assam
reported in 2025 INSC 32, as such no purpose would serve to
keep the vehicle for identification in police station, it is expedient
to avoid situation of vehicle getting deteriorated pending the trial
and hence, keeping in mind the aforesaid peculiar fact and
keeping in mind the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat
reported in (2002)10 SCC 283, with certain stringent
conditions, present petition deserves consideration in exercise of
powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. Resultantly, this petition is ALLOWED.
8. The learned Trial Court / authority concerned is directed
to release the vehicle of the petitioner being BYD Atto 3, 4-
wheeler car bearing RTO registration No.MH-04-MN-2389 on the
terms and conditions that the petitioner:
(i) shall furnish a solvent surety of the amount
equivalent to the price of the vehicle in question stated in
the FIR / panchnama.
(ii) shall file undertaking before the learned Trial Court
that he shall not transfer / change the identity, color etc.
of the vehicle till final disposal of the trial.
(iii) shall produce the vehicle as and when directed by the
learned Trial Court.
(iv) if in future, any confiscation / auction proceedings
under the NDPS Act is initiated by the authority, in that
event, the petitioner shall have to hand over / return the
possession of the vehicle to the respondent authority and
the petitioner shall file an undertaking to the said effect
before the learned Magistrate;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14059/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025
undefined
(v) in the event of any subsequent offence, the vehicle shall
stand confiscated;
(vi) present order does not preclude the learned
Magistrate / Authority from passing any order to initiate
confiscation proceeding or auction order of vehicle;
(vii) while handing over the possession of the vehicle,
learned trial Court is directed to verify the factum of
registered owner of the vehicle and handover the vehicle to
the registered owner and registered owner of the
muddamal vehicle shall submit undertaking as regards
confiscation proceedings.
9. Before release of the vehicle, concerned police authority
shall take photographs / identity of the vehicle from all sides at
the cost of the petitioner and shall draw necessary panchanama
to that effect. Said panchanama and photographs shall be part
of charge sheet papers for the purpose of trial.
10. A copy of this order be sent to concerned RTO, where the
vehicle is registered, for necessary entry in the Register and to
take notice that this Court has restrained transfer of vehicle till
final disposal of the trial. Such transfer shall be subject to any
order that may be passed by the learned Trial Court permitting
transfer of vehicle.
11. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is
permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
AHS
