Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
M/s Swarnali Traders – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam – Respondent
Crl. Pet. Nos. 213, 245 of 2024
Decided On : 14-03-2024
CUSTODY - Seized Areca Nuts - Cr.P.C. 451, 457 - The court discussed the provisions of Cr.P.C. 451 and 457 and their applicability at different stages of investigation, enquiry, and trial. The court emphasized that the power of the Magistrate under Section 457 Cr.P.C. is during the stage of the investigation and not the stage of enquiry or trial. The judgment highlighted the conditions precedent for the exercise of power under Section 451 Cr.P.C. and the alternative remedy available to the petitioner under the Code for custody of the seized areca nuts.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought custody of seized areca nuts, claiming they were legally purchased and transported, while the prosecution alleged the nuts were of foreign origin and meant to be smuggled.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner had an alternative remedy available under the Code for custody of the seized areca nuts.
Issues: The main issue was the custody of the seized areca nuts, with the petitioner claiming legality of purchase and transportation, while the prosecution alleged smuggling and illegal transportation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the applicability of Cr.P.C. 451 and 457 at different stages of investigation, enquiry, and trial, and highlighted the conditions precedent for the exercise of power under Section 451 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The petition seeking custody of the seized areca nuts was dismissed, with the court emphasizing the availability of an alternative remedy under the Code for the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
1. Heard Mr. A.M. Bora, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. V.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state/respondent.
2. This is an application under Section 482 read with 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C. for giving custody of the seized areca nuts which were seized by the Government Railway Police at Guwahati Railway station on 17.02.2024 on the basis of an FIR which was registered on 18.02.2024 as G.R.P.S Case No. 53/2024 under Sections 120(B)/379/411/410/413/420/ 468/471 of the IPC.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the jurisdictional ASI, G.R.P.S. lodged an FIR alleging inter-alia that on 17.02.2024 at around 6.15 p.m. upon receipt of secret information from reliable sources, searched the luggage break No. 225869/C (front side) of train No. 12504 DN, SMVT Bengaluru Humsafar Express on its arrival at the Guwahati Railway Station.
4. It is the further case of the prosecution that during search, 347 numbers of gunny bag were unloaded from the aforesaid luggage break weighing about 65 kgs. per bag totalling to 22,555 Kgs.
5. It is the further case of the prosecution that on preliminary investigation, it was suspected that the seized areca nuts were of foreign origin and were meant to be smuggled and illegally transported by unknown culprits without paying any government authorities and without any valid document.
6. Accordingly a search and seizure list was prepared.
7. Thereafter, a case was registered.
8. Mr. A.M. Bora, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner in the course of its business had legally purchased Indian Local Dried Areca nuts from traders duly recognized by the Department of Horticulture and Soil Conservation, Agartala, Government of Tripura. He further submits that the petitioner bought 2475 kgs of Local Dried Areca nuts on 07/01/2024, 1000 kgs on 11/01/2024, 4500 kgs on 15/01/2024, 1170 kgs on 22/01/2024, 1350 kgs on 23/01/2024 and 4500 kgs on 28/01/2024 from Mausam Store and M/S Rujhana Enterprise and accordingly paid the GST on all the purchases.
9. He further submits that the petitioner sold 11970 kgs. of the said areca nuts to one Sri Jayadeva Trading Company of Siddapura, Karnataka on 15/02/2024 and paid the GST for the said goods and that the goods were to be transported by rail and road respectively.
10. He further submits that the petitioner in order to transport the Areca Nuts booked the Areca Nuts first by road from Dharmanagar to Agartala Railway Station and then in the cargo of Train No. 12504 DN, SMVT Bengaluru Humsafar Express, from Agartala to Karnataka on 16/02/2024. He further submits that the parcel van of the train was being handled by R.M. Logistics.
11. He further submits that when the train reached Guwahati Railway Station on 17/02/2024, the police officials of the Government Railway Police offloaded the goods suspecting them to be smuggled foreign areca nuts.
12. He further submits that the petitioner states that the seized areca nuts had been procured from a Government authorized traders of Tripura and was sold by the petitioner by paying all requisite taxes to the Government.
13. He further submits that the petitioner is a respected businessman of Tripura and is not involved in any illegal activities such as smuggling or any criminal conspiracy.
14. He further submits that though the petitioner has not committed any illegality or crime while doing its business of selling and transportation of areca nuts, the police officials of GRPS has without any reason seized the areca nuts.
15. He accordingly submits that the Petitioner has filed the instant application praying for grant of custody of 171 bags of seized areca nuts weighing around 70 kgs. each, i.e. 11,970 kgs in total.
16. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the other hand strongly opposes the prayer for grant of subject custody.
17. He submits that the Case Diary receiv
Release of seized property during investigation – At investigation stage, seized articles cannot be released by Court under Section 451 Cr.P.C. – However, under Section 457 of Cr.P.C., Criminal Court....
The court emphasized that interference at the stage of issuance of show cause notice should be rare and not in a routine manner, and the availability of alternative remedy should be considered before....
The magistrate's jurisdiction under Section 457(1) of the CrPC to order disposal of seized property is not limited to cases where the property is not produced in court during an inquiry or trial, but....
An application for release of a seized vehicle under Section 451 Cr.P.C. during pendency of confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable before the M....
The court established that an application for release of a seized vehicle during the pendency of confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of The Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable before ....
The burden of proof for non-notified goods under the Customs Act lies with the Customs Department to establish smuggling, which must be supported by cogent evidence.
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
