Supardari release of seized semi-perishable goods permitted only with strict safeguards and valuation-based security

Seized goods, including semi-perishable articles, were considered fit for release on supardari because no other claimant had come forward and continued detention risked loss in value. The release was permitted in the transporter's possession, but only with safeguards to protect the State's interest and the trial process. Those safeguards included a substantial fixed deposit receipt linked to the goods' value, State verification of valuation, retention of the deposit until final disposal, preparation of an inventory and photographs, and an undertaking that recovery from the vehicles would not be disputed. The goods were therefore ordered to be released subject to strict protective conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized goods were liable to be released on supardari and, if so, on what conditions.

Analysis: The application for release concerned goods seized during investigation and some of the articles were of a semi-perishable nature. No other person had come forward to claim ownership, while the respondent sought possession in the capacity of transporter. In such circumstances, continued detention would risk diminution in value. Release was therefore justified, but only with safeguards to protect the interest of the State and the trial proceedings. The Court accordingly required a substantial FDR linked to the value of the goods, verification of the value by the State, preservation of the FDR until final disposal, preparation of inventory and photographs, and further undertaking by the respondent not to dispute recovery from the vehicles.

Conclusion: The seized goods were ordered to be released on supardari to the respondent, subject to strict protective conditions.

---