In an important judgment, the Punjab and Haryana high court has laid down guidelines for release of vehicles confiscated by the police in criminal cases, languishing and decaying in and around police stations for years.
“.. keeping the vehicle in police possession for years is not going to serve any purpose. The solution is to record a video of the vehicle and to play the same to the victims/witness(s), so that it can be easily identified. Needless to say, digital evidence can be stored indefinitely simply by upgrading the technology,” the bench of justice Anoop Chitkara observed.
The petition was from one Amit Tanwar from Gururgram, who had sought release of a car allegedly used in an assault case. He filed for release of the vehicle on superdari before the Gurugram court. However, the plea was dismissed by court while taking into account the police objections that it is a case property in a case wherein some of the accused are yet to be arrested. It was against this order that he had approached the high court in September 2025.
“If we assume that the co-accused are never arrested or arrested after a considerable time, would it be justifiable to keep the vehicle with the police for ages? If the incident had taken place in a metro or a plane, or by firing from the door of a train, would such vehicles be seized, and hypothetically if yes, for how many years simply because the accused is not available or cannot be arrested? Rather, it would be let off after conducting a forensic science examination and a proper search,” the court said, further adding, “Had the incident taken place in a battery-operated rickshaw, usually driven by people with meagre means, or in a taxi, which is hypothecated and monthly installments of loan and interest have to be paid against advanced post dated cheques or standing debit instructions, should the livelihood of such a person be put at stake simply because the incident/accident had taken place in their vehicle?” it remarked while favouring release of such case properties.
{{/usCountry}}“If we assume that the co-accused are never arrested or arrested after a considerable time, would it be justifiable to keep the vehicle with the police for ages? If the incident had taken place in a metro or a plane, or by firing from the door of a train, would such vehicles be seized, and hypothetically if yes, for how many years simply because the accused is not available or cannot be arrested? Rather, it would be let off after conducting a forensic science examination and a proper search,” the court said, further adding, “Had the incident taken place in a battery-operated rickshaw, usually driven by people with meagre means, or in a taxi, which is hypothecated and monthly installments of loan and interest have to be paid against advanced post dated cheques or standing debit instructions, should the livelihood of such a person be put at stake simply because the incident/accident had taken place in their vehicle?” it remarked while favouring release of such case properties.
{{/usCountry}}However, the court has made it clear that these guidelines only deal with the release of vehicles and none else, and that too only those vehicles which are not required to be confiscated under any statute or judicial orders.
It remarked that if the vehicle is kept in a police parking lot, its value would depreciate, it would rust and decay, making it impossible for any person to identify the vehicle. “If the vehicle is left in a seized condition, it will lose roadworthiness, turn into junk, and eventually exceed the time limit for which it was designed and approved to run on the roads. Additionally, the case of property being stolen, released, or destroyed under misidentification, or lost can also not be ruled out,” it further remarked adding that the court cannot lose sight of the fact that the open spaces in and outside the police stations have abundant seized vehicles. Thus, the remedy does not lie in keeping vehicles parked at police stations, but in resorting to digital evidence.
It hoped that the district judiciary, while adjudicating the applications for the release of vehicles would take into account conditions laid down in this order and directed the high court registry to send the order to all the district courts.
Conditions imposed by the court
The forensic science examination and proper search of the vehicle shall be conducted.
A mechanical report shall be prepared by any expert
Photos of the vehicle shall be taken from all directions, photo(s) of the chassis number, engine number, registration plates, if any, and photo(s) of the claimant/registered owner with the vehicle sought to be released. The digital photographs shall be uploaded to the investigating agency’s official web page(s).
The SHO shall direct making a high-quality/high density video recording of the vehicle from all directions, also from opening the bonnet and cabin, including chassis number and the engine number.
The vehicle owner shall file affidavit(s) declaring that the he is the registered owner of the vehicle or its purchaser.
The registration certificate of the vehicle/purchaser shall be returned to the applicant by keeping an authenticated copy for the records.
Subject to clearing hypothecation, if any, the seizure shall not be construed as any binding, obstruction, or hindrance in the ownership rights of the registered owner of the vehicle, who shall be entitled to sell it
Following release vehicle owners shall be entitled to make alterations in the vehicle, including a change of colour, exterior, or interior, etc.