Allahabad High Court issues directions to tackle accumulation of seized vehicles at police stations

The Allahabad High Court has taken cognizance of the failure of authorities and courts in Uttar Pradesh to release the vehicles seized by police or various government departments under various laws [Birender Singh vs State of UP and Another]..Justice Vinod Diwakar noted that each day, the Court was burdened with 10 to 15 applications seeking release of vehicles seized in cases under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), the 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.“It has been observed that a significant number of vehicles across Uttar Pradesh are left outside police stations in a state of disrepair— non-functional, dismantled, inoperable, reduced to mere chassis, rusted, and unused,” the Court said.This is despite the Supreme Court having laid down the procedure for release of seized vehicles in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the High Court observed..To address the situation, Justice Diwakar ordered that a report be called from all District Judges in Uttar Pradesh to identify the legal impediments faced by courts in the release of the vehicles.“Upon receiving a copy of this order, the District Judge shall immediately convene a meeting with all judges in their jurisdiction to gather suggestions regarding the deficiencies or irregularities committed by confiscating authorities, officers, or investigating officers at the time of vehicle seizure. A comprehensive report, including suggestions on how the procedure detailed by the Supreme Court could be strictly followed by the courts when deciding release applications, is to be submitted. Any other relevant suggestions regarding vehicle seizures, inventory management, auction processes, or vehicle release from courts will be appreciated,” ordered the CourtIt further directed the District Judges to consult with the District Magistrates and district police heads and include their suggestions in the report. .Similarly, the Court directed the State as well as the Police to propose measures for reducing the congestion of seized vehicles at police stations“The Chief Secretary, UP, in consultation with law enforcement agencies and other relevant departments, should also suggest whether the creation of a web- portal where all details of seized and confiscated vehicles can be uploaded is possible or not with the assistance of NIC, by way of an affidavit. This platform, if created, would allow courts and law enforcement agencies to reference the information as needed,” it said further.Meanwhile, the 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 of vehicles confiscated/ seized by them.The police must also provide police station-wise reports, it clarified while listing the matter for hearing on September 18..The Court took note of the issue while hearing a plea seeking the release of a vehicle seized by the authorities in a case pertaining to the recovery of illicit liquor. The district court had earlier refused to release the vehicle. While disagreeing with the approach of the trial courts, Justice Diwakar said, “It's unfortunate that the Constitutional Courts are often impeded in cases involving the release of vehicles on Supardari during trials, despite the Supreme Court having established a detailed procedure in the Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai case (supra) as far back as 2002, which is not consistently followed by the trial courts. This is a pressing issue before this court, and a concerning situation has arisen; therefore, this court has taken cognizance on it.”.It noted various reasons for accumulation of vehicles at the police stations,(i) the owner may not have filed a release application;(ii) the courts may have rejected the release applications;(iii) the owner may lack sufficient funds to produce surety bonds against the release order;(iv) vehicles may be held as evidence in ongoing trials, preventing their disposal until the trial concludes;(v) bureaucratic inefficiencies or a lack of streamlined processes for seizure, confiscation, auctioning, scrapping, or disposing of unusable vehicles;(vi) prolonged exposure to harsh weather conditions leading to rusting and further degradation;(vii) neglect or oversight within the police administration..The Court observed that there was no uniform or consistent approach adopted by the courts in dealing with vehicle release applications. Additionally, the State government lacks a centralised authority or agency to document and reflect details of vehicles seized and confiscated by the police and other departments, it added“This is crucial because, in many cases, vehicles released by the court are repeatedly used by criminals, merely by altering number plates and chassis numbers,” the Court observed. .Advocates Pankaj Sharma and Pradeep Kumar represented the petitioner..[Read Order]