Patna High Court
Raju SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The order refusing release of the vehicle was illegal and is quashed, with the vehicle to be released on a surety of Rs.5,00,000 subject to conditions.
Summary
Raju Sah petitioned the Patna High Court to quash the order of the Gopalganj Sessions Court that refused release of his seized truck, which contained 3.10 kg of ganja. The petitioner argued that the refusal was illegal because no confiscation proceeding under the NDPS Act had been initiated, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai. The State contended that the vehicle remained under seizure pending trial. The High Court, noting the absence of NDPS confiscation proceedings and the Supreme Court precedent, allowed the petition, directing the vehicle's release on a surety of Rs.5,00,000 with a condition that it not be sold during the trial, while permitting a later application for permission to sell. Consequently, the impugned order dated 29.04.2024 was quashed.
Issues considered
- What is the legality of refusing release of a seized vehicle when no confiscation proceeding under the NDPS Act has been initiated?
- Does the Supreme Court precedent in Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai require release of seized property on surety pending trial?
- Can the petitioner be permitted to sell the seized vehicle during the pendency of criminal proceedings?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 379, 406, 411, 414, 420
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 8(c)(b)
Subjects
- vehicle seizure
- NDPS Act
- confiscation proceeding
- surety
- release of property
- criminal procedure
- quashing order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15692 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2019 Thana- SIDHWALIYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Raju Sah, Son of Yogendar Sah, Resident of Dakshineshwar, P.S. -
Dakshineshwar, District - North 24 Parganas (West Bengal).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 12-02-2026
Heard Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, the learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Zainul Abedin, the learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an application seeking quashing of the
order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the Court of learned 1st Addl.
Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in connection with Sidhwaliya P.S.
Case No. 203 of 2019 (Trial No. 25 of 2019) under Sections
414, 420, 406, 379, 411 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 8 (c) (b), 20 (b) (ii) (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short the N.D.P.S. Act),
whereby the truck of the petitioner, bearing Registration No.
WB23D-7262, Engine No. 61E63519205 and Chassis No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15692 of 2025 dt.12-02-2026
2/3
MAT448037GLE2941, has not been released in his favour.
3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that his truck, referred to above, was seized by the authorities
concerned on account of the fact that 3.10 Kg. of Ganja, kept in
a school bag, was recovered from the said truck.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the
ground that the same is illegal for the fact that the release of
such vehicle should not be rejected in view of the observations
made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunder Bhai
Amba Lal Desai Vs. The State of Gujarat & Ors., reported in
2002 (10) SCC 29.
5. Mr. Zainul Abedin, the learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor for the State, has submitted that he has brought on
record the fact by way of counter affidavit that no confiscation
proceeding under the N.D.P.S. Act has been initiated for the
confiscation of the vehicle in question.
6. In view of the aforesaid submissions and taking
into account the background facts of the present case as also the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai (supra), the present application
stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15692 of 2025 dt.12-02-2026
3/3
7. The vehicle in question, bearing Registration No.
WB23D-7262, Engine No. 61E63519205 and Chassis No.
MAT448037GLE2941, is directed to be released in favour of the
petitioner on his furnishing surety of Rs. 5,00,000/- with a
condition that the same shall not be sold by him during the
pendency of the criminal proceedings arising out of Sidhwaliya
P.S. Case No. 203 of 2019 (Trial No. 25 of 2019).
8. The petitioner shall have the liberty to approach
the learned Trial Court, in case he finds that the keeping of the
vehicle would ultimately lead to losses and, therefore, he can
file an application seeking permission to sell the said vehicle.
9. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the
application stands allowed and the order impugned in the
present petition, dated 29.04.2024, referred to above, is, hereby,
quashed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 13.02.2026
Transmission Date 13.02.2026
Checking your session…