Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Property Seized in Criminal Investigations Requires Proper Custodial Orders from the Concerned Criminal Court: Supreme Court Clarifies Law in Vehicle Seizure Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India today provided clarity on the proper legal procedures for the custody and disposal of property seized in connection with criminal investigations, particularly under the Gujarat Prohibition Act. Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal delivered the judgment in the case of Khengarbhai Lakhabhai Dambhala vs The State of Gujarat.

The appeal concerned the seizure and potential release of a vehicle under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, with a focus on the application of Sections 451 and 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) regarding property seized in connection with a large quantity of illicit liquor.

The appellant, claiming ownership of the seized vehicle, approached the High Court seeking its release. The vehicle had been seized carrying a significant quantity of illicit liquor. The High Court dismissed the application, prompting the current appeal. The main issue revolved around whether the Special Criminal Application filed by the appellant was an appropriate legal recourse for the release of the seized vehicle.

Proper Procedure for Seized Property: The Court emphasized that under Section 451, Cr.P.C., it is the responsibility of the criminal court to decide on the proper custody of seized property during investigation or trial.

Analysis of Gujarat Prohibition Act: The Court delved into Sections 98 and 132 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, distinguishing between the powers of authorized officers and courts in the confiscation and seizure of property.

Harmonious Construction of Section 98(2): The Court applied the doctrine of harmonious construction to resolve ambiguity in Section 98(2) of the Act, reconciling it with the Cr.P.C. and other provisions of the Act.

Role of Criminal Courts Under Cr.P.C: The Supreme Court directed that the proper course of action in cases involving the custody of seized property is to approach the appropriate criminal court under Section 451, Cr.P.C.

Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court’s decision. The appellant was directed to seek remedy under Section 451, Cr.P.C. at the concerned criminal court for the release of the vehicle.

Date of Decision: April 8, 2024.

Khengarbhai Lakhabhai Dambhala vs The State of Gujarat,

 

Latest Legal News