JUDGMENT :

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to bring on record the order passed by the respondent No.2 by which the premises of the petitioner, namely, M/s C.D.P. Laboratories, Sultanganj Road, Khijuria, Deoghar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the said premises’) situated at Plot No. 50, Mouza-Khijuriya, No. 420, P.S.-Mohanpur, District-Deoghar, measuring an area of 01 acre was ordered to be sealed. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order of seizure passed by the respondent No.2 with respect to the said premises.

2. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that on 25.04.2014, a lease deed was executed by the petitioner in favour of his son-Devendra Kumar for a period of five years commencing from 25.04.2014 till 31.03.2020 to start manufacturing and trading of Allopathic medicines in the said premises. Thereafter, Devendra Kumar started the said business over the leased property in the name and style of M/s C.D.P Laboratories. On 14.02.2017, an FIR was lodged against one Utam Kumar and the petitioner’s son-Devendra Kumar @ Devendra Yadav under Sections 272/273/379/411 IPC and Section 47(a) of the Jharkhand Excise Act, 1915. Thereafter, Devendra Yadav @ Devendra Kumar filed an application before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar for unsealing of the said premises in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 32/2017 (G.R. No. 268/2017), however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 03.10.2019. Aggrieved with the said order, Devendra Kumar preferred Cr. Revision No. 206/2019 in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar, which was also dismissed vide order dated 25.06.2020 with following observations :

“6. On perusal of lower court record, it transpires that after initiation of the proceeding for cancellation of the manufacturing license as per provisions of Excise Act, Rules and M and T P Act/Rules, show-cause notice to revisionist was issued by the D.C, Deoghar for filing explanation. It is reported that in that very proceeding the said premises has been locked and sealed and manufacturing license of the company has been cancelled.

7. In this way, it is very much clear that in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 32 of 2017 said premises has not been locked and sealed, hence learned magistrate was having no jurisdiction to entertain and pass order in respect to subject matter which is not the subject matter of the case concerned. If revisionist was having any grievance against the order of the learned Deputy Commissioner he would have challenged it before the competent forum under the relevant provision of law but it has not been done. Thereafter, when the locking of the premises has not been done in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 32 of 2017 then the learned Judicial Magistrate was having no jurisdiction to go through the legality, propriety as well as correctness of the order passed by the D.C., Deoghar invoking the jurisdiction under the provisions of Excise Act/Rules, Medicinal and Toilet Preparation (Excise Duties) Act/Rules. Hence, I am of the view that rejection of the prayer by the learned magistrate is correct which requires no interference by this court.

8. In the result, this revision petition is being dismissed and impugned order is hereby upheld. It is made clear that if revisionist is having any grievance against the order of the learned Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar by which manufacturing license of the company has been cancelled and premises of the company has been locked and sealed, then he may challenge its legality, validity etc. before the competent forum by challenging that very order under the relevant provisions of Excise Law and Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act and Rules. Let a copy of this order along with lower court record be sent to the court concerned for information and needful.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that from the aforesaid observations