[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Vipulkumar Trikambhai Sedani vs State Of Gujarat on 24 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11139/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (POSSESSION OF MUDDAMAL)
NO. 11139 of 2025
==========================================================
VIPULKUMAR TRIKAMBHAI SEDANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS URVASHI K MEHTA(11469) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.JAY S SHAH(7244) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 24/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
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
and Section 497 read with Section 528 of BNSS with a prayer to release
Muddamal Vehicle i.e Fortuner Car bearing RTO registration No. GJ-
36-B-3636.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondents.
3. The case of the prosecution is that while the police
personnel were on patrolling, they received a secret information
of the vehicle in question carrying liquor and when police
authorities intercepted the same, on carrying out the search of the said
vehicle, it was found that the Accused was carrying liquor without any
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11139/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
pass or permit. Therefore, an FIR being CR. NO. 11208037250204 of
2025 for the offence punishable under the Prohibition Act came to be
registered before the Kuvadva Road Police Station, Rajkot.
4. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the
respondent.
5. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has urged that this Court has
wide powers, while exercising such powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution. It can also take into account the ratio laid down in the case
of 'SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT', AIR 2003
SC 638, wherein, the Apex Court lamented the scenario of number of
vehicles having been kept unattended and becoming junk within the
police station premises.
6. Learned APP for the respondents has objected the submissions
made by learned advocate for the petitioner and urged that, of course,
powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to
order release of the vehicle can be exercised at any time, whenever the
Court deems it appropriate.
7. The coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Musa Khan Jat
Vs. State of Gujarat (SCR.A/7190/2017), in an identical case, released
the vehicle by exercising the power under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India.
8. It would be worthwhile to refer profitably at this stage to the
observations made by the Apex Court in 'SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11139/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
DESAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT' (Supra), which read as under:
"15. Learned senior counsel Mr. Dholakia,
appearing for the State of Gujarat further
submitted that at present in the police station
premises, number of vehicles are kept unattended and
vehicles become junk day by day. It is his
contention that appropriate directions should be
given to the Magistrates who are dealing with such
questions to hand over such vehicles to its owner or to
the person from whom the said vehicles are
seized by taking appropriate bond and the
guarantee for the return of the said vehicles if
required by the Court at any point of time.
16. However, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners submitted that this question of handing over
vehicles to the person from whom it is seized or to its true
owner is always a matter of litigation and a lot of
arguments are advanced by the concerned persons.
17. In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use
to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a
long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate
orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and
guarantee as well as security for return of the said
vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done
pending hearing of applications for return of such
vehicles."
9. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. The authority concerned is
directed to release the vehicle of the petitioner, being Fortuner Car
bearing RTO registration No. GJ-36-B-3636 on the terms and
conditions that the petitioner:
(i) shall furnish a solvent surety of the amount equivalent to the
value of the vehicle in question as per the value disclosed in
the seizure memo or panchnama.
(ii) shall file an undertaking before the trial Court that prior to
alienation or transfer in any mode or manner, prior
permission of the concerned Court shall be taken till
conclusion of the trial;
(iii) shall also file an undertaking to produce the vehicle as and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11139/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026
undefined
when directed by the trial Court;
(iv) in the event of any subsequent offence, the vehicle shall
stand Confiscated.
10. Before handing over the possession of the vehicle to the
petitioner, necessary photographs shall be taken and a detailed
panchnama in that regard, if not already drawn, shall also be drawn for
the purpose of trial.
11. Rule is made absolute, accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
SAKSHI MAURYA
