Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JYOTI SARAN and ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN, JJ.
(21.5.2019)
CWJC No. 10439 of 2019
CTI Infrastructure Private Limited : Petitioner
Vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. : Respondents
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 – Section 30(a) – Against the seized articles and restraining from the initiation of confiscation proceeding – One such course of transportation that the petitioner entered into an agreement with the United Breweries Limited for transportation of its goods/beer through the designated routes as indicated in the transport permits – Authorities in the Excise Department that while it is their bounden duty to implement the law on prohibition in the State also have a duty to safeguard the constitutional rights available to the citizens of this Country and which cannot be interfered with either on whims or on mechanical application of the law even when the documents support a valid transportation from the originating station untill its destination – Simple cross over to the territory of the State is not to be eyed with suspicion unless there are reasons to back such suspicion and which in the present case is absolutely lacking – Direction to ensure release of the truck together with the goods loaded thereon as fully described in the documents supporting transportation failing which the petitioner be entitled to a cost quantified at Rs. 10 lacs payable by the Excise Department, Govt. of Bihar – Confiscation proceeding initiated agaisnt the vehicle and the goods quashed – Writ petition allowed. (Paras 2 to 8; 10 to 14 and 18 to 21)
JYOTI SARAN, J.:–The petitioner by filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for the following reliefs:—
(i) Issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to forthwith release 300 cases of beer, (220 cases of Kalyani Black Label Strong Beer-500 ml Can and 80 cases of Kingfisher Extra Strong Premium Beer- 500 ml Can) owned by M/s United Breweries Ltd., which has been seized in connection with Kishanganj P.S.Case No. 85 of 2019 dated 15.2.2019, instituted under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, which was being lawfully transported on the strength of valid statutory documents/ permits issued by the West Bengal Excise Department from Celebrity Breweries Pvt. Ltd, Mauza- AIMA and Somsar, P.S. Dadpur, Hooghly, West Bengal, West Bengal to BEVCO Warehouse of the West Bengal State Beverage Corporation Limited, at Siliguri, District Darjeeling.
(ii) To restrain the respondents from initiating any proceeding for confiscation of the aforesaid consignment of beer, seized in connection with Kishanganj P.S.Case No. 89 of 2019 dated 15.2.2019, as the consignment was lawfully transported from Celebrity Breweries Pvt. Ltd., Mauza- AIMA and Somsar, P.S. Dadpur, Hooghly, West Bengal to BEVCO Warehouse of the West Bengal State Beverage Corporation Limited, Siliguri, District West Bengal.
With the consent of the parties the writ petition has been heard with a view to final disposal at the stage of admission on completion of pleadings.
2. The facts of the case briefly stated is that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at 50, Chowringhee Road, ISSCO House, Block B, 10th Floor, Kolkata. The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing transportation services to its clients and during which course it transports different goods to different parts of the Country. The case of the petitioner is that it is in one such course of transportation that the petitioner entered into an agreement with the United Breweries Limited for transportation of its goods/ beer through the designated routes as indicated in the transport permits. A copy of the agreement is enclosed at Annexure 1 to the writ petition. It is the case of the petitioner that it is based on such agreement that the petitioner had hired a Tata 407 vehicle bearing registration No. WB 89/0104 for transportation of 300 cases of beer (220 cases of Kalyani Black Label Strong Beer and 80 cases of Kingfisher Extra Strong Premium Beer, each packed in 500 ml. Can). The beer owned by M/s United Breweries Ltd. was manufactured at the contract brewery namely M/s Celebrity Breweries Pvt. Ltd., Mauza AIMA and Somsar, P.S. Dadpur, Hooghly, in the State of West Bengal and was to be transported to BEVCO Warehouse of the West Bengal State Beverage Corporation Limited, Siliguri, West Bengal.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the vehicle carrying beer duly supported with lawful and valid documents issued by the West Bengal State Beverages Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Beverages Corporation’) at Annexure 2 series was on its way to its destination at Siliguri on 13.2.2019 following designated route through Memari, Morgram, Malda and Siliguri passing through Dalkola and Kishanganj on the National Highway and no sooner it entered the check-post at Kishanganj in the State of Bihar that it was stopped, the vehicle together with the goods loaded thereon seized, a police case registered giving rise to Kishanganj P.S.Case No. 85/2019 for alleged violation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and the driver and Cleaner made accused for such violation. A copy of the F.I.R. is at Annexure 4.
4. The petitioner after representing before the District Magistrate, Kishanganj on 22.2.2019 with reminders on 25.2.2019 and 15.3.2019 and getting no response has approached this Court through the writ petition in question for the re
SupremeToday
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
