Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Soumya Ranjan Behera – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the documents annexed thereto and order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the Excise Commissioner, Odisha, Cuttack in Excise Appeal Case No.28/2024-1252.
3. The present application has been filed at the instance of the Petitioner thereby invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S. with a prayer to quash the order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the Excise Commissioner, Odisha, Cuttack in Excise Appeal Case No.28/2024-1252 at Annexure-6 and consequentially to quash order 14.11.2024 passed by the Authorized Officer-cum- Superintendent of Excise, Cuttack in Excise C.P. Case No.81/2024-25 at Annexure-4.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the vehicle in question was seized while it was carrying liquor. Accordingly, a case was registered against the accused persons and, accordingly, a criminal prosecution was launched bearing P.R. No.73 of 2024-25 which is now pending before the learned J.M.F.C. (Cog-Taking-II), Cuttac
The Odisha Excise Act, 2008 establishes that confiscation proceedings are stand-alone and not governed by the Cr.P.C., limiting the court's inherent jurisdiction to intervene.
The appropriate authority under the Odisha Excise Act must initiate confiscation proceedings; an unauthorized initiation cannot bar the owner's right to reclaim a seized vehicle.
Premature confiscation of property under the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act is impermissible and may cause irreparable loss.
Confiscation orders under the M.P. Excise Act can be issued despite ongoing criminal trials, necessitating a reference to a Larger Bench due to conflicting opinions among Coordinate Benches.
Confiscation of a vehicle under the Odisha Excise Act requires evidence of its involvement in an offence, and procedural fairness must be upheld, allowing the petitioner an opportunity to prove lack ....
The court held that evidence must sufficiently establish vehicle involvement in offences, and the claimant must prove no knowledge or participation in illegal activities for release from confiscation....
The acquittal of accused in a criminal trial must be considered in confiscation proceedings, protecting property rights under Article 300A.
The courts lack jurisdiction to grant interim custody of a seized vehicle if confiscation proceedings have been initiated by the Collector under the M. P. Excise Act.
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
