Supreme Court Rules Section 98(2) of Gujarat Prohibition Act Not Absolute Bar for Interim Release of Seized Vehicle

Case Snapshot

• Case Name: M/S ABC Express v. State of Gujarat

• Citation: 2026 INSC 940

• Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar

• Date of Judgment: September 2, 2026

• Area of Law: Criminal Procedure, Prohibition Law, Interim Custody of Seized Property

The Judgment in One Line

Supreme Court holds that Section 98(2) of Gujarat Prohibition Act is not an absolute embargo and courts can order interim release of seized vehicles under Section 451 CrPC pending trial.

Why This Judgment Matters

This judgment resolves a recurring conflict between special prohibition laws and general criminal procedure provisions regarding interim custody of seized vehicles. The Court clarifies that confiscation provisions under the Prohibition Act operate in a different field from Section 451 CrPC, which governs interim custody during trial. The ruling prevents seized vehicles from languishing at police stations, causing deterioration and loss of livelihood, while safeguarding the State's interest through adequate security conditions.

Background

A truck belonging to M/S ABC Express was intercepted on January 4-5, 2025, while transporting 8,064 bottles of Indian-Made Foreign Liquor (approximately 22,532 litres) along with edible goods worth Rs. 98,66,552. The driver failed to produce any permit. An FIR was registered under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 98(2), 81, 116(b) and 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

The appellant-owner sought interim custody of the vehicle under Section 497 BNSS (corresponding to Section 451 CrPC). The Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the application on May 22, 2025. The Se

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.