Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Vinay Saraf
Ramlal Jhariya – Appellant
Versus
State Of M.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. confiscation order background and challenges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner argues against jurisdiction for confiscation. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. clarification of law regarding simultaneous confiscation and trials. (Para 7) |
| 4. court analyzes the impact of ongoing criminal trials. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. court distinguishes between confiscation proceedings and criminal trials. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. emerging questions and need for larger bench consideration. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
ORDER :
Vinay Saraf, J.
Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of confiscation passed by the Collector, District Narsinghpur under Section 47 (A)(2) of the M.P.Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1915') on 14.08.2023, whereby the vehicle Mahindra Bolero bearing registration No.MP04-TB-2350 owned by petitioner was ordered to be confiscated. Petitioner has challenged the order of Collector passed under Section 47 (A)(2) of the Act, 1915 by preferring the present writ petition mainly on the ground that the order passed during the pendency of criminal case registered under Section 34 (2) of the Act, 1915 and, therefore the order is without jurisdiction and the same can be assailed in the writ pet
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
