The court can allow the release of a seized vehicle on conditions despite ongoing confiscation proceedings if initial proceedings were not timely initiated.

ORDER :

1. This is an application under Section 401 read with Section 397 of Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 18.11.2020 passed in C.M.C. No.80 of 2020 arising out of G.R. Case No.588 of 2019 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Karanjia, rejecting the application of the petitioner filed under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure refusing to release the vehicle registered in his name which had been seized in G.R. Case No.588 of 2019 registered for commission of offence punishable under Section 272 of the IPC and Section 52 (a) of Odisha Excise Act.

2. I have heard Mr. R.N. Rout, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State through hybrid mode.

3. The petitioner is the registered owner of Indigo CS Car LX TCIC bearing registration No. OR-02-BF-2992 , which had been seized on 19.12.2019 by the I.O. in connection with Karanjia P.S. Case No.198 of 2019 registered for commission of offences punishable under Section 52 (a ) of the Orissa Excise Act 2008 and Section 272 of the I.P.C against one Sailendra Muduli .

4. The prosecution allegations in brief are that on receipt of information that one Sailendra Muduli was procuring ID liquor and adulterating it at his house in ward No 10 , Karanjia and thereafter delivering it to various street sellers and at the relevant time was coming in Indigo CS Car LX TCIC bearing registration No. OR-02- BF-2992 with such liquor , on 19.12.2019 the vehicle was detained and was found to be driven by Sailendra Muduli loaded with about 100 litres of liquor kept in a big black tube concealed under a bag without any supporting documents . samples were drawn and the vehicle and liquor were seized and case registered .

5. Mr. R.N. Rout, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner had filed an application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. for release of the vehicle No. OR-02-BF-2992 and this application was erroneously rejected vide order dated 18.01.2020 in CMC 6 of 2020 on the ground that confiscation proceeding has already started against the seized vehicle as per the report of the I.O. The petitioner had thereafter filed CMC - 65 of 2020 , but it was dismissed as the petitioner had not filed anything to disbelieve the earlier report of the I.O. The petitioner thereafter filed another application under of Cr.P.C. ( CMC No.80 of 2020) with the report of the P.I.O cum Superintendent of Excise , Mayurbhanj which indicated that the confiscation proceeding was under process . On 18.11.2020 , this application was erroneously rejected .The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the vehicle released in favour of the petitioner as confiscation proceedings had not been initiated against the petitioner when the impugned order had been passed . His further submission was that since the date of seizure the vehicle is lying under the open sky exposed to the sun and rain for which its value is deteriorating every day and it would not be in the interest of the State even if the vehicle was ultimately directed to be confiscated .His final submission is that he is the registered owner of the vehicle and is ready to abide with any condition which may be imposed by the Court for granting interim release of the vehicle.

6. Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate objects to the said prayer submitting that since the confiscation proceeding has in the meanwhile been initiated against the petitioner and not