NITINKUMAR MOHANBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for the respondent State.

(2.) What is challenged in the present writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India is the order dated 10.11.2020 passed by learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Dharamapur, Valsad as well as the order dated 30.09.2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dharampur rejecting the prayer of handing over the muddamal vehicle having its registration No. GJ-15- CG-3190 in connection with the FIR being Prohibition C.R.No.11200018200097 of 2020 registered with Dharampur Police Station, Valsad for the offence under the provisions of Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 ('the Act' for short). Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) It is contended by learned advocate for the petitioner that learned trial Court as well as revisional Court have not handed over interim custody of the vehicle in question in view of the provisions of Section 98 of the Act which provides embargo for handing over the custody of the vehicle used in the offence pending the trial. It is, therefore, requested that appropriate directions should be given to the concerned Magistrate/Trial Court who is dealing with such questions to hand over such vehicle to its owner or to the person from whom the said vehicle is seized by taking appropriate bond/guarantee/solvent surety for the return of the said vehicle if required by the Court at any point of time.