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

2011 Supreme(All) 2195

[2011(9) ADJ 31 (NOC)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
S.C. AGARWAL, J.
SAMUNDRA ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.14959 of 2011, decided on 4th August, 2011)

Advocates:
Ram Babu Sharma for the Petitioner; A.G.A. for the Respondents.

Headnote:U.P. Excise Act, 1910—Sections 72(2) and (1)—Confiscation—Release of vehicle—Application for—Refusal of—At time of confiscation of vehicle—Collector is obliged to pass an order regarding payment of a fixed sum fine to be paid by owner—In lieu of confiscation—Such amount cannot exceed market value of vehicle on date of its seizure—Therefore, exercise of ascertaining market value of vehicle has to be done before passing order for confiscation—Moreover, it is not necessary that fine should be equivalent to market value of vehicle—But, it shall not exceed market value of vehicle—Collector is empowered to impose a lesser amount of fine in lieu of confiscation—Such discretion should be exercised in a judicious manner—Impugned order unsustainable.

       

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 Back to top