SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(Ker) 300

Judges : V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI,G.BALAGANGADHARAN NAIR
ASST.EXCISE COMMR. - Appellant
Versus
VIJAVAN - Respondent
Case No : W.A. No. 114, 139 of 1980
Decided On : 12/19/1980
Advocates Appeared :
K. Sudhakaran; For Appellants V. Sivaraman Nair; V.M. Nayanar; V. Bhaskaran Nambiar; C.R. Natarajan; For Respondents

The Act does not apply to public passenger vehicles operating scheduled services, and the seizure and confiscation of such vehicles are not warranted under the Act.

Headnote:

Confiscation - Abkari Act - S.67B, S.67C

Fact of the Case:

The State and excise officials filed writ appeals against the judgments of a single Judge quashing the proceedings for confiscation of two motor vehicles under S.67B of the Abkari Act. The vehicles were seized after contraband liquor was found in the possession of passengers.

Finding of the Court:

The single Judge found that the orders of confiscation were illegal and unwarranted as the vehicles were public passenger vehicles operating scheduled services, and the Act did not apply to them. The court directed the Assistant Excise Commissioner to consider the case afresh.

Issues: Whether the confiscation of the vehicles under S.67B was legal, and if the Act applied to public passenger vehicles.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Act did not apply to public passenger vehicles like stage carriages and vans operating scheduled services, and the seizure and confiscation of such vehicles were not warranted under the Act.

Final Decision: The writ appeals were dismissed, and the court directed the Assistant Excise Commissioner to consider the case afresh, taking into account the legal position explained in the judgment.

Judgment :-

1. These two writ appeals have been filed by the State jointly along with the concerned officials of the excise department against the judgments of a learned single Judge of this court allowing O. P. No. 2258 of 1978 and O. P No 1134 of 1978 and quashing the proceedings taken against the writ petitioners for confiscation of two motor vehicles belonging to them under S.67B of the Abkari Act. 1077 (hereinafter called the Act). Since the points raised in the two appeals are substantially identical they have been heard together at the request made by counsel appearing on both sides.

2. Writ Appeal No. 114 of 1980 arises out of O.P. No 2258 of 1978. The writ petitioner therein is the owner of a stage carriage vehicle (motor bus) bearing registration No K.L.C. 8605 which is operating a service on the route Tholpetti-Mannontoddy on the basis of a permit granted by the concerned Regional Transport Authority. On 10-9-1977 at about 2 P. M. while the bus was proceeding from Tholpetti the Circle Inspector of Excise, Mannantoddy stopped the vehicle near Thirunelli Amsom and recovered from one of the passengers 20 bottles containing Indian made foreign liquor which were concealed in a suit-case and 3 bottles of foreign liquor wrapped in paper and kept near that suit-case under the seat. The bus was thereupon seized and besides the concerned passenger, the driver, conductor and the cleaner of the bus were arrested by the preventive officer of the excise department on the ground that there was a violation of S.55A of the Act. The offence against the passenger was later compounded on his remitting Rs. 300 as the compounding fee. Thereafter the Assistant Excise Commissioner, Cannanore issued notice to the writ petitioner under S.67C of the Act to show cause why the vehicle should not be confiscated to the Government. Similar notices were also issued to the driver, conductor and cleaner of the bus. The writ petitioner submitted a detailed representation denying his having committed any offence under the Act and stating that he had no knowledge at all that the passenger concerned was carrying contraband liquor in the suit-case and in the paper package. The said defence was not accepted by the Assistant Commissioner and he ordered confiscation of the bus under S.67B of the Act as per his proceedings dated 17-11-1977 evidenced by Ext. P6. On appeal filed by the writ petitioner before the Joint Commissioner of Excise, Trivandrum the order of confiscation was modified to the extent of permitting the writ petitioner to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000 to the Government in lieu of confiscation within 30 days from the date of the appellate order (Ext. P8 dated 2-6-1978). In rejecting the petitioner's contention that no offence bad been committed by him so as to warrant confiscation of the vehicle under S.67B, the appellate authority took the view that there is no rule or law under which the staff of a stage carriage bus is prevented from checking the luggage of the passengers and that it is their bounden duty to ensure that no contraband articles, the transport of which is prohibited under any law, are sought to be transported in the vehicle of which they are in charge. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the appellate authority the petitioner approached this court by filing the original petition out of which this appeal has arisen seeking to quash Exts. P6 and P8.

3. Writ Appeal No. 139 of 1980 arises out of O.P. No. 1134 of 1978. The writ petitioner is the owner of a Tempo van bearing registration No. KLC 7977 which is operating a passenger service between Payyannur railway station and Payyannur town on the strength of the permit issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Cannanore. On 30-8-1976 while the vehicle was operating the said service it was stopped and checked by the Excise Range Inspector, Payyannur and on inspection it was found that 3 bottles of Mysore arrack covered in a bed sheet was being carried in the van by a passenger by n
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top