Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It appears that the petitioners vehicle has been seized under Section 207 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The remedy in such a case is to apply under Section 207 (2) of the said Act. However, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to a Division Bench decision of this Court in Phool Chandra \. A. R. T. C. and others decided on 24-9-1996 being writ peti tion No. 30970 of 1996, copy of which is Annexure-6 to the writ petition. In this decision it has been held that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of either approaching the authority concerned under Section 207 (2) of the said Act or to approach the Magistrate concerned under section 457 Cr. PC. In my humble opinion, the above decision requires to be recon sidered since in my opinion the only alterna tive remedy where the vehicle is seized under Section 207 (1) is to apply under Sec tion 207 (2) of the Act. In my opinion, there is no remedy to apply under Section 457 Cr. P. C. This is so because the special law over rides the general law. The Motor Vehicles Act is a special law relating to Motor Vehicles and it will override the general law in the Cr. P.