IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JITENDRA KUMAR, J.
Kalam Ansari, Son Of Jahril Ansari – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar - Opposite Parties
Criminal Miscellaneous No.11188 Of 2024
Decided On : 22-05-2024
JUDGMENT :
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing and setting aside the order dated 28.11.2023 passed by Ld. Special Judge (Excise), Court No.-II, Muzaffarpur in Excise P.S. Case No. 1777 of 2023 dated 11.09.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 48 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, whereby Ld. Special Court has rejected the application filed on behalf of the Petitioner to release the seized Truck bearing Registration No. JH-10CR-7110, Chassis No. MC2ERHRC0PDB05988, Engine No. E446CDP063534 in favour of the Petitioner holding that the jurisdiction of the Special Court is barred under Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act to release the vehicle seized under the Act.
2. As per the materials on record, the vehicle in question was seized by the Police with 2847 liter liquor and subsequently, Excise P.S. Case No. 1777 of 2023 dated 11.09.2023 was lodged against the owner, who is the Petitioner herein, and other two Accused persons for offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 48 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Heard Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and Ld. APP for the State.
4. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the petitioner possesses all valid documents relating to the vehicle showing that he is owner of the vehicle. He further submits that he has also valid documents regarding the liquor which was loaded in the Truck. He also claims that Ld. Special Court has jurisdiction to release the vehicle under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. However, Ld. APP for the State defends the impugned order submitting that under Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, jurisdiction of the Special Court is barred in regard to release of any vehicles seized under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and hence, there is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order. He further submits that the seized vehicle in question is liable to be confiscated under Section 56 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. However, under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, as stands after amendment in 2022, read with Section 57B of the Act, 2016, the Petitioner is at liberty to get the vehicle released after payment of penalty as stipulated in the Rules.
6. Before I proceed to consider the rival submissions of the parties, it would be pertinent to refer to relevant statutory provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
7. Section 60 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, bars jurisdiction of any Court to pass any order in regard to seized vehicle or other articles under the Act. It reads as follows:-
“60. Bar of jurisdiction in confiscation.-Whenever any liquor, material, still, utensil, implements or apparatus or any receptacle, package, any animal cart, vessel, or other conveyance used in committing any offence, is seized or detained under this Act, no court shall have, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, jurisdiction to make any order with regard to such property.”
8. Section 56 of the Act provides for liability of seized vehicles, amongst other seized items, for confiscation. It reads as follows:-
“56. Confiscation of Seized Items:-Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 57B, whenever an offence punishable under this Act, is committed, the Collector or an officer authorized by him may confiscate such items based on the report of the investigating officer.
(2) Such items may include -
(i) any premises or part thereof;
(ii) any animal, vehicle, vessel or conveyance;
(iii) any liquor or intoxicant;
(iv) any other item having bearing with the case;
Provided, where things as mentioned in Section 57 are to be destroyed, then the Collector or an officer authorized by him need not confiscate the same before their destruction.
(3) The State Government may issue necessary direction, guidelines, reg
Suresh Sah Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Sunaina @ Suneina Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., 2024 SCC OnLine Pat 851, AIR ONLINE 2024 PAT 73
Binit Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., 2024 SCC OnLine Pat 850, 2024 (2) BLJ 341
AI
The Special Excise Court lacks jurisdiction to release seized vehicles under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, but the High Court retains writ jurisdiction to address arbitrary seizures.
Confiscation of a vehicle under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act requires evidence of the owner's consent or involvement in illegal activities; failure to establish this renders confiscation inva....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for timely initiation and conclusion of confiscatory proceedings under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, and the issuance of dir....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for timely initiation and conclusion of confiscation proceedings under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, and the introduction of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for expeditious implementation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, particularly in the initiation and conclusion of confiscatio....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.