Back
UMESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Ajay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Umesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
2. This application has been made by the accused -applicant to quash the order dated 19.07.2021 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah, in criminal case no. 781 of 2020 and order dated 16.10.2021 passed by Learned Sessions Judge in criminal revision no.76 of 2021 rejecting the application of applicant for releasing his vehicle no. (U.P. 80 CT 3283), in case crime no. 594 of 2019, U/s 60, 63, 72 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Etah.
3. In brief, facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged in case crime no. 594 of 2019, at Police Station Kotwali Dehat, U/s 60, 63, 72 of Excise Act, District Etah. A copy of the FIR dated 21.12.2019 has been filed as annexure no.1 to the affidavit. The applicant is not involved in the said crime and he never gave consent for the purpose of the alleged illegal work. The relatives use the vehicle of the applicant for own purposes.
4. The applicant filed an application for the release of his vehicle no. UP 80 CT 3283 on 4.8.2020 before the C.J.M., Etah which is
Point of Law : Only remedy remains available to the applicant is to challenge the validity of confiscation proceeding conducted by the District Magistrate.
The Magistrate lacks jurisdiction to release property seized under the Uttar Pradesh Excise Act when confiscation proceedings are pending, as established by Section 72 of the Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the lower courts must determine their own jurisdiction under Section 457 Cr.P.C. to release a seized vehicle during pending confiscation proce....
The provisions contained under sub-sections (1) to (4) of Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, denude the Magistrate of his power to pass any order under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Proce....
The provisions contained under sub-sections (1) to (4) of Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, clearly denude the Magistrate of his power to pass any order under Section 457 of the Code of Crimin....
Points of Law : Confiscation of vehicle - Provisions contained under subsection(1) to (4) of Section 72 of the Excise Act would have the effect of denuding the Magistrate of his power to pass any ord....
During confiscation proceeding, the Magistrate has no power under sections 451 or 457 Cr.P.C. to release the vehicle.
As per provisions of Section 72(7) of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, against the order of confiscation passed by the District Magistrate, Civil Appeal would lie before the District Judge of the respective Di....
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
