Back
NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Pramit – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Rajiv Sisodia, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Criminal Misc. Exemption Application is allowed.
3. The factual matrix of the matter may be summarized in the manner that two persons Pramit and Surendra were intercepted by the police while engaged in transporting 12 bottles of illegal liquor having a wrapper with remark of 'Royal Stag Whisky for sale in Haryana and Delhi' endorsed upon it in a Ford Ecosport Car bearing registration No. HR 06AH -2718 on 25.10.2023 at 18:30 P.M. Both the accused persons were arrested and the liquor was seized and sample was taken by the police on spot and memo of recovery and arrest was also prepared and F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 60, 63, 72 of the Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
4. Subsequently an application for release of Car No. HR 06AH -2718 claiming himself to be the registered owner of the said vehicle was moved by one of the accused Pramit, but the said application was rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shamli vide order dated 19.12.2023 in case crime no. 591 of 2023 simply on the ground
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.
Point of Law : Only remedy remains available to the applicant is to challenge the validity of confiscation proceeding conducted by the District Magistrate.
The court established that an application for release of a seized vehicle during the pendency of confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of The Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable before ....
Judicial orders must reflect application of mind and provide reasons; the Magistrate has jurisdiction to release vehicles not used for transporting illicit goods.
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
