Alam, J. -- 1. This judgment will dispose of the four appeals in all of which the same question arises for consideration. The question is whether a vehicle or vessel etc. seized under section 50(1)(c) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") is put beyond the power of the Magistrate to direct its release during the pendency of trial in exercise of powers under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"). On behalf of the appellant, the State of Madhya Pradesh, it is strongly contended that the answer to the question would be only in the affirmative. The contention appears to us to be ex facie untenable but in order to examine the stand of the State Government it would be necessary to state the facts and circumstances in which the question arises and to take note of the relevant provisions of law in light of which it is to be answered.

2. The facts of the case are taken from Civil Appeal No.5199 of 2001, the State of Madhya Pradesh v. Madhukar Rao, which was the leading case before the High Court. On March 12, 1997 of about 3:30 a.m., in course of checking a Sub-Inspector of Excise found a T