The requirement of giving proper notice before property confiscation under the Abkari Act is mandatory.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed for a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to get temporary release of the articles and the amounts seized by the excise party on 20.04.2018 in OR No.28/2018 on executing bond towards the value of the same pending the confiscation proceedings under Section 67B of the Abkari Act to be initiated by the second respondent in the light of Ext.P3 order compounding the offence. There is also a prayer to the second respondent to finalise the confiscation proceedings under of the as per Ext.P4 request within a stipulated time.

2. The petitioner had alleged in the writ petition that no proceedings were initiated under Section 67B of the Abkari Act , and the said delay is causing loss to the petitioner.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the second respondent, contending that when an abkari case has been compounded under Section 67A, the property seized shall be confiscated by the government or disposed of in such manner as may be prescribed. The power of the government to confiscate cannot be doubted at all. However, in terms of the express provision under Section 67C, issuance of a show-cause notice before confiscation under Section 67B is mandatory, as Section 67C(1) stipulates that no order confiscating any property shall be made under section 67B unless the person from whom the same is seized is given a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on which it is proposed to confiscate such property and also to be given an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the grounds of confiscation with an additional requirement of giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

4. In view of the above, there cannot be any doubt that before confiscation, notice has to be issued with an additional requirement of intimating the noticee of the grounds on which the proposed confiscation is being brought and allowing making a representation against the same and after giving an opportunity of being heard. In view of the counter affidavit filed in this case, it is clear that no notice proposing confiscation has been served on the petitioner. The petitioner also alleges that the order was not communicated to him.

5. Along with a memo submitted by the learned Government Pleader on 11.02.2026, an order dated 25.10.2018 has been produced, which gives no reason why a confiscation has been made. It also does not speak of the notice issued to the petitioner informing him of the grounds of the proposed confiscation, or whether any opportunity was given to make a representation against the confiscation or whether he has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Under such circumstances, proceeding No.Q7- 3154/2018 dated 25.10.2028 is void and non-operative and falls in the teeth of Section 67C of the Abkari Act .

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent, the Authorised Officer, to proceed further for confiscation only in strict compliance with Section 67C of the Abkari Act by issuing a notice informing him of the grounds of the proposed confiscation and also giving him a reasonable opportunity to represent against the same and after hearing him. Since the writ petition was filed on 03.06.2019 and the above-referred order of confiscation was passed on 25.10.2018, I am inclined to permit the second respondent to proceed further under Section 67C, if he chooses to do so, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the second respondent does not proceed within the six weeks' time granted, the said respondent shall be restrained from invoking the provisions at this distance of time.

The writ petition is allowed as above.