Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Diptesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. illegal transport of liquor. (Para 4) |
| 2. claims over ownership and legality of transport. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of evidence and legal standards. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. reconsideration of rejection orders. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the application as well as the prayer made therein.
4. On perusal of the record, it appears that initially the S.I. of Police, Kesinga P.S., while performing his patrolling duty, received credible information that four persons including the driver of the vehicle are illegally transporting foreign liquor in a Tata 1109 EX Turbo bearing Registered No.OR17G3978, which was plying from Narla to Kesinga side, about to enter Kesinga Town. Since there was every likelihood that the accused persons were going to enter the Kesinga Town along with liquor, the Informant stopped the vehicle by conducting a search. On being asked, the driver of the vehicle disclosed that he has been engaged by the owner of the vehicle as a driver and that his owner has directed to load the liquor from Sonepur OSBC. Accordingly, the liquor stock was loaded in the
The court ruled that ownership of the liquor and its non-adulteration justified the release of seized goods despite route deviation under the Odisha Excise Act, 2008.
Presence of entire quantity of liquor as case property during trial will not be required.
The court held that releasing impounded liquor would reward the petitioner for permit violations, which is impermissible under law.
Provisions in Section 67B of the Act operate independent of Section 67C, it is not to be taken that when an owner does not invoke the provision in Section 67C, there should be confiscation under Sect....
The acquittal of accused in a criminal trial must be considered in confiscation proceedings, protecting property rights under Article 300A.
The conviction under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was set aside due to prosecution's failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt based on procedural violations.
The court has the discretion to modify orders and allow the release of a vehicle on 'Superdari' with specific conditions based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
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
