ARVINDBHAI MAHIJIBHAI PADHIYAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to invoke extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to release the muddamal vehicle - Maruti Suzuki Omni Car, bearing RTO registration No. GJ-06-EQ-8847 in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. III - 836 of 2019, registered before the Vadodara Taluka Police Station, Dist. Vadodara (Rural) for the offence punishable under Sections 65(A) (E), 81 and 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The petitioner had preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 62 of 2020 before the learned 8th Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Vadodara, who, by an order dated 20.01.2020 rejected such application, against which, the petitioner preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 113 of 2020 before the learned 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vadodara, who, by an order dated 23.09.2020 confirmed the order of the learned Magistrate.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Darshit R. Brahmbhatt for the petitioner and learned APP Mr. L. B. Dabhi on behalf of the respondent - State through video conference. Factual Matrix of the case:

(3.) As per the allegations made in the FIR, liquor worth Rs.26,000/- was found in the muddamal vehicle. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the muddamal vehicle in question. It is further the case of the petitioner that the learned Courts below have rejected the release of muddamal applications, only because of restriction under Section 98(2) of the Prohibition Act and if the muddamal vehicle would lie at the police station for more time, there will be physical damage to it and therefore, interference of this Hon'ble Court is required in the interest of justice. It is submitted that otherwise, the petitioner is neither named in the FIR nor has any antecedents.