Patna High Court
Virendra Sah @ Birendra SahversusThe State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise Registration Dept., Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court ordered the release of the seized vehicle to the petitioner, subject to conditions and security, as per the principles laid down in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat.
Summary
Virendra Sah filed a writ petition seeking the release of his Mahindra Scorpio vehicle seized by police in Salkhua under multiple sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 45 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, alleging involvement in illicit liquor offences. The petitioner argued that no liquor was recovered and no confiscation proceedings were initiated, contending that retaining the vehicle caused waste of resources. The State maintained that the vehicle obstructed police in intercepting a liquor‑laden vehicle, justifying the seizure. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the court held that seized articles should be released promptly with appropriate security to avoid undue loss. Consequently, the court ordered the vehicle’s release to the petitioner subject to conditions imposed by the trial court within one month, and allowed the petition.
Issues considered
- The legality of the seizure of the petitioner’s vehicle under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to the release of the seized vehicle pending trial.
- Whether the State’s claim of obstruction and commission of an offence under Section 45 Excise Act justifies continued detention of the vehicle.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 132, 221, 324(6), 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 451
Subjects
- vehicle seizure
- release of seized property
- excise law
- provisional relief
- Section 45 Excise Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Section 451 CrPC
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1957 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2025 Thana- SALAKHUA District- Saharsa
======================================================
Virendra Sah @ Birendra Sah, S/o- Sakal Sah, R/o Villege-Manori
(Sonbarsaraj), Ward No- 13, P.S-Sonbarsaraj, District-Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise
Registration Dept., Bihar Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise Registration Dept. Govt.of
Bihar, Patna Bihar
3. The Collector, Saharsa, Dist- Saharsa Bihar
4. The Superintendent of Police, Saharsa Bihar
5. The Superintendent of Excise, Saharsa Bihar
6. The S.I Salkhua, Saharsa Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Pawan Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ramadhar Singh, GP-25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 09-01-2026
Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
2. The present writ application has been filed seeking
following reliefs :-
“(i). For direction the Respondents
Authorities to release the Mahindra Scorpio S3
vehicle in question bearing Registration no. BR-
11PB-8287, Chassis No.MA1TA2TDKK2G19695,
Engine No. TDK4G81690 in favour of petitioner
which was illegally seized by the police in Salkhua
P.S. Case No.29/2025 on 15.02.2025.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1957 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
2/5
(ii). For direction the Respondents
Authorities not to take any coercive action against
the said Scorpio vehicle during pendency of the
present writ application.
(iii). For any other appropriate
relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled in
the facts and circumstances of the present case.
3. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that Salkhua P.S. Case No. 29 of 2025 has
been registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 221, 132, 324(6),
109(1), 3(5) of BNS and Section 45 of Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Amendment Act, 2022 with allegation that the vehicle of
the petitioner was also involved in commission of the offence
under the Excise Act as well as under the provisions of BNS.
The learned senior counsel further submits that there has not
been recovery of any illicit liquor from the vehicle and the
allegation against the vehicle, that it was used to obstruct the
police officials in apprehending the vehicle loaded with the
illicit liquor, is not supported with any other material. The
learned senior counsel further submits that no confiscation
proceeding has been started in this case till date. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court in a number of cases has held that keeping the
vehicle in police station and allow it rot in open results in
national loss of resources. The petitioner is ready to furnish
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1957 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
3/5
adequate security for release of his vehicle and the vehicle may
be released in favour of the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
State respondent vehemently opposes the submission made on
behalf of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the State
submits that the vehicle of the petitioner was apprehended while
it obstructed the police officials in intercepting the vehicle
which was loaded with the illicit liquor. Thus, the offence under
Section 45 of Excise Act has been committed apart from other
offences under the provisions of BNS.
5. Since the petitioner has approached this Court with
prayer to release his vehicle, hence, without going into merits of
the rival submission of the parties and having regard to the
guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2002)10
SCC 283, I am of the view that the release of the vehicle could
be ordered, with the undertaking from the petitioner and
furnishing adequate security on behalf of the petitioner, to stop
further damage and wastage of the resources.
6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra) has observed the following:
“In our view, the powers under Section 451,
Cr.P.C. should be exercised expeditiously and
judiciously. It would serve various purposes,
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1957 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
4/5
namely:-
1. Owner of the article would not suffer
because of its remaining unused or by its
misappropriation;
2. Court or the police would not be required
to keep the article in safe custody;
3. If the proper panchnama before handing
over possession of article is prepared, that
can be used in evidence instead of its
production before the Court during the trial. If
necessary, evidence could also be recorded
describing the nature of the property in detail;
and
4. This jurisdiction of the Court to record
evidence should be exercised promptly so that
there may not be further chance of tampering
with the articles.”
While dealing with the seized vehicles from time to
time by the police either in commission of various offences or
abandoned vehicles or vehicles which are recovered during
investigation of complaint of thefts, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra) further
observed as under:-
“In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of
no use to keep such-seized vehicles at the
police stations for a long period. It is for the
Magistrate to pass appropriate orders
immediately by taking appropriate bond and
guarantee as well as security for return of the
said vehicles, if required at any point of time.
This can be done pending hearing of
applications for return of such vehicles.
In case where the vehicle is not claimed by the
accused, owner, or the insurance company or
by third person, then such vehicle may be
ordered to be auctioned by the Court. If the
said vehicle is insured with the insurance
company then insurance company be informed
by the Court to take possession of the vehicle
which is not claimed by the owner or a third
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1957 of 2025 dt.09-01-2026
5/5
person. If Insurance company fails to take
possession, the vehicles may be sold as per the
direction of the Court. The Court would pass
such order within a period of six months from
the date of production of the said vehicle
before the Court. In any case, before handing
over possession of such vehicles, appropriate
photographs of the said vehicle should be
taken and detailed panchnama should be
prepared.”
7. Therefore, the Mahindra Scorpio S3 vehicle of the
petitioner bearing Registration no. BR-11PB-8287, Chassis
No.MA1TA2TDKK2G19695, Engine No. TDK4G81690, seized
in connection with Salkhua P.S. Case No. 29 of 2025, is directed
to be released in favour of the petitioner/registered owner
subject to the satisfaction and the conditions to be imposed by
the learned trial court, within a period of one month from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.01.2026
Transmission Date 09.01.2026
Checking your session…