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

2014 Supreme(Ker) 745

P.B.SURESH KUMAR
P. RAVICHANDRAN – Appellant
Versus
EXCISE INSPECTOR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR
For the Respondent: P.FAZIL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

JUDGMENT :

The Petitioner is the registered owner of a stage carriage operating on the route Thrissur - Guruvayur - Kozhikode. On 22.03.2012, the vehicle of the petitioner was seized by the excise officials for the reason that the same was used for illicit transportation of foreign liquor. According to the excise officials, 57 bottles of foreign liquor were found concealed in the vehicle of the petitioner. Ext.P4 notice was issued thereafter by the second respondent to the petitioner directing him to show cause why his vehicle shall not to be confiscated under Section 67B of the Abkari Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short. Petitioner sent Ext.P5 reply to Ext.P4 show-cause notice. Thereupon, the second respondent ordered confiscation of the vehicle of the petitioner as per Ext.P6 order. Ext.P6 order was challenged by the petitioner before the third respondent in an appeal under Section 67E of the Act and the third respondent, as per Ext.P8 order, dropped the proceedings initiated against the vehicle of the petitioner, after setting aside Ext.P6 order. Ext.P8 order was set aside by the fourth respondent as per Ext.P10 order, in exercise of his powers under Section 67F













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top