The Allahabad High Court has raised serious concerns about delays in releasing vehicles seized under various laws in Uttar Pradesh. Justice Vinod Diwakar highlighted the frequent influx of daily applications for vehicle release.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: The Allahabad High Court has expressed deep concern over the failure of authorities in Uttar Pradesh to release vehicles seized under various laws by the police or government departments. Justice Vinod Diwakar, presiding over the case, highlighted the alarming frequency with which such issues come before the Court.
Every day, between 10 to 15 applications are filed, seeking the release of vehicles seized under multiple legislations, including the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, UP Excise Act, Mines and Minerals Act, and the Motor Vehicles Act.
The Court observed a widespread issue of vehicles seized in Uttar Pradesh being left to deteriorate, citing that many of these vehicles were left in an unusable state.
“It has been observed that a substantial number of vehicles across Uttar Pradesh are left outside police stations in a state of disrepair—non-functional, dismantled, inoperable, reduced to chassis, rusted, and unused.”
– the High Court noted.
This worrying trend persists despite clear guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat case, where a detailed procedure for the release of seized vehicles was established. However, authorities have failed to adhere to these established guidelines, leaving hundreds of vehicles in a state of neglect.
In response to this problem, Justice Diwakar has taken proactive steps to resolve the situation. The Court has ordered a comprehensive report from all District Judges in Uttar Pradesh to investigate the legal hurdles that are preventing the timely release of seized vehicles.
“Upon receiving a copy of this order, the District Judge shall promptly convene a meeting with all judges in their jurisdiction to collect suggestions on deficiencies or irregularities committed by confiscating authorities, officers, or investigating officers during vehicle seizures.”
– the Court directed.
The High Court further requested a-
“a comprehensive report with recommendations on how the Supreme Court’s detailed procedure for handling release applications can be strictly implemented by the courts.”
This report will also include suggestions on handling inventory management, auction processes, and vehicle release from the courts.
To ensure a holistic approach, the Allahabad High Court also ordered the District Judges to collaborate with District Magistrates and district police heads to include their suggestions in the report. The Court also called upon the State and the Police to come up with strategies to reduce the overcrowding of seized vehicles at police stations.
In a notable observation, the Court said-
“The Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, in coordination with law enforcement and relevant departments, should determine whether it is feasible to create a web portal for uploading details of seized and confiscated vehicles, with assistance from NIC, and provide this information through an affidavit.”
The Court emphasized that such a platform could allow for easy access to critical information about seized vehicles by both law enforcement agencies and courts.
Additionally, the High Court directed the State Director General of Police (DGP) and the Secretaries of Transport and Excise Departments to submit district-wise and transport authority-wise reports on vehicles that have been seized or confiscated. The police were also ordered to submit police station-wise reports, thus ensuring a thorough review of the situation across Uttar Pradesh.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on September 18, where the High Court will continue to review the submissions made by various authorities and departments.
The issue came to light while hearing a plea seeking the release of a vehicle seized in connection with a case related to the recovery of illicit liquor. The lower district court had previously denied the release of the vehicle, which prompted the petitioner to move to the Allahabad High Court. Justice Diwakar, while disagreeing with the lower court’s decision, expressed his disappointment at the approach taken by the trial courts.
“It is regrettable that Constitutional Courts frequently face obstacles in cases involving the release of vehicles on Supardari during trials, despite the Supreme Court’s detailed guidelines established in the 2002 Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai case. This procedure is not consistently followed by trial courts, creating a pressing issue that has prompted this court to take cognizance of the situation.”
-Justice Diwakar remarked.
Reasons for Accumulation of Seized Vehicles
During the hearing, the Court outlined several reasons for the accumulation of seized vehicles at police stations:
- Vehicle owners may not have filed a release application.
- Courts may have rejected the release applications.
- Some owners may lack sufficient funds to produce surety bonds against the release order.
- Vehicles may be held as evidence in ongoing trials, delaying their release.
- Bureaucratic inefficiencies or a lack of streamlined processes for seizure, confiscation, auctioning, scrapping, or disposing of unusable vehicles.
- Exposure to harsh weather conditions leading to rusting and further degradation.
- Neglect or oversight within the police administration.
The High Court also noted that there was no uniform or consistent approach being adopted by trial courts in dealing with vehicle release applications, adding to the delay in their release.
In a critical observation, the Court warned of the risk associated with the improper release of vehicles.
“This is crucial because, in many cases, vehicles released by the court are often misused by criminals, who simply alter the number plates and chassis numbers.”
-the Court remarked.
The petitioner’s case was represented by advocates Pankaj Sharma and Pradeep Kumar, who highlighted the broader issues surrounding the release of vehicles in Uttar Pradesh.
