Failure to comply with mandatory search procedures under the A.P. Excise Act vitiates criminal proceedings, constituting an abuse of process.

ORDER :

V.Sujatha, J.

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/A.2 in Crime No.190 of 2021 registered on the file of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Chirala, Prakasam District, for the offences punishable under Section 34 (a) of the A.P. Excise Act (Amendment) Act-2020.

2. The petitioner herein is A.2. The Inspector, SEB, Ongole registered a case in Crime No.190 of 2021 for the offence punishable under Section 34 (a) of the A.P. Excise Act , (Amendment) Act- 2020, against the petitioner and others basing on the mediator’s report. As per the mediator’s report, on 29.07.2021, the Inspector along with his staff, SEB Station, Chirala on receipt of credible information about illegal possession and sale of Non-duty paid liquor bottles, after securing the mediators, reached the house of the accused No.1 at about 7.00 p.m., at Rajubangarupalem Village, Chinnagangam Mandal and searched the house of accused No.1, as they found two bags, first bag containing 37 bottles of Old Admiral Brandy each 180 ml and second bag containing 23 bottles of Good day Pristage Whisky each 180 ml non duty paid liquor bottles for sale Telangana State only and without Heeals and on further interrogation about the liquor bottles in the second plastic warehouse accused No.1 confessed that accused No.3 gave liquor bottles at the instance of accused No.2. Basing on the said confession statement of accused No.1 they were impleaded as accused Nos.2 and 3. The Inspector took each brand one bottle as sample for chemical analysis and then sealed and seized the remaining case property and sample bottles and arrested the accused No.1. Basing on the said mediator’s report, the present crime has been registered against the petitioner/A.2 herein.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, among other things, mainly challenges the validity of criminal proceedings launched against the petitioner on the ground of non-compliance with the procedure contemplated under Section 55 of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968. He submits that before conducting search, the respondent- police ought to have obtained warrant as per Section 54 of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968 or otherwise, ought to have followed the procedure contemplated under Section 55 of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968, which the complainant-police did not do so. He further submits that the failure on the part of the respondent-police in following the procedure contemplated under the provisions of Section 55 of the Act, which is mandatory in nature, vitiates the entire proceedings against the petitioner. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision reported in K.L. Subbayya v. State of Karnataka, [1(1979) 2 SCC 115] , to contend that non-compliance with the provisions of Section 54 of the A.P. Excise Act , before proceeding to conduct a search by an officer and without prior recording of the grounds for his belief that an offence under the Act is likely or being committed, renders the entire search without jurisdiction and as a corollary, it vitiates the launching of criminal proceedings and on that ground alone, he prays for quashing the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/A.2.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents, would contend that on reliable information about illegal possession and seal of Non-duty paid liquor bottles and on the instructions of the Inspector, SEB Station conducted raid and seized the material, and therefore, the police followed the procedure as contemplated under law and there are no circumstances to quash the proceedings as prayed for.

6. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, t