The court mandated timely release of seized vehicles, emphasizing economic efficiency and adherence to established procedures to prevent misuse and degradation, aligning with the Supreme Court's guidelines.

Hon’ble Vinod Diwakar. J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by learned A.G.A. for the Staterespondents, and perused the record.

2. In the present case, an FIR was registered by the police on the complaint of Excise Inspector. Following the registration of the FIR, a huge quantity of illicit liquor and Rs.14,03,550/- was recovered, and also a Mahindra Pick UP vehicle, bearing Registration No. UP-16-JT- 5779, was seized. The owner of the vehicle filed an application before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, seeking release of the vehicle. Accordingly, a response was called from the District Magistrate, who responded by stating that since the matter is pending trial, the vehicle may not be released. Based on this response, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the application for release of the vehicle. Aggrieved by the rejection order dated 10.5.2024, the applicant filed a Revision Petition bearing no.174 of 2024, before the learned District Judge, Aligarh. The counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon Prem Swamy v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Reported in 1997 Allahabad Criminal Cases (Suppl.) 99 and Dhirendra Singh Thapa v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, Criminal Revision No.1926 of 2016However, the learned District Judge distinguished the applicants’ case from those cited cases, noting that the referred cases involved the seizure of vehicles under the NDPS Act, whereas the applicants’ case involved a violation of the provisions of the U.P. Excise Act and thereby rejected the revision petition.

3. The learned District Judge overlooked a well-known and widely referred judgment by the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat , (2002) 10 SCC 283 which addresses the detailed procedure for release of vehicles and goods seized by investigating agencies. Instead, the learned District Judge decided the revision petition by distinguishing the petitioner’s case from the case decided by the High Court in 1997. It is worth noting that in Prem Swamy’s case (supra), a co-ordinate Bench of this Court allowed the revision petition and directed the release of the seized vehicle on Supardari to the owner, in a case where the vehicle was confiscated in violation of the provisions of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910.

4. For clarity, the Supreme Court in the Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai case (supra) held that the powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be exercised expeditiously, as this would serve several purposes: (i) the owner of the article would not suffer due to it remaining unused or being misappropriated; (ii) the court or police would not need to keepthe article in safe custody; and (iii) if a proper Panchnama is prepared before handing over possession of the article, it can be used as evidence during the trial instead of requiring the article's production. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded, detailing the nature of the property.

5. In compliance with the order dated 05.08.2024, the learned District Judge, Aligarh, submitted a report dated 16.08.2024. Upon examining the report, it is observed that Criminal Revision No. 174 of 2024, filed by the applicant Birendra Singh, was allowed, and the order dated 10.05.2024, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, in Misc. Application No. 98/11/2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 123/2024, registered under Sections 60, 63, and 72 of the Excise Act, P.S. Tappal, District Aligarh, has been set aside. The matter was remanded back to the learned Magistrate to reconsider the applicant’s application afresh for the release of the vehicle in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in the Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai case (supra). The issue has been resolved in this particular case; however, the underlying situation remains unchanged and is expected to persist in other similar cases.

6. Ev