ORDER

This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 04.02.2023, passed in Criminal revision No.02/2023, passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen whereby it has affirmed the order dated 25.01.2023, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisen dismissing the applicant's application under Section 451/457 of Cr.P.C. for handing over the vehicle on Supurdaginama.

2. Facts of the case are that on 08.01.2023, Police Gairatganj, intercepted a Swift Dzire car bearing registration No.MP-04-TB-2766 and in the search of the car it recovered 18 carton of the country made liquor. In total 162 bulk liter liquor was seized. Offence was registered at Crime No.06/2023 for commission of offence under Section 34(2) of the M.P.Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as "Act"). Applicant who is the registered owner of the vehicle moved an application under section 451/457 of Cr.P.C. for taking the vehicle on Supurdagi. Same was dismissed by order dated 12.01.2023 (Annexure D), passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on the ground that letter has been sent by the Police to Collector/District Magistrate, Raisen for initiating the proceedings of confiscation of the vehicle. The said order was challenged by the applicant before the Court of Sessions. Learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen by order dated 20.01.2023, passed in Cr.R.No.01/2023 (Annexure E) set aside the order passed by the learned Magistrate and directed the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to reconsider the application and to pass fresh order as learned Chief Judicial Magistrate had not taken into consideration the case law of Suresh Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2003(1) MPLJ 639 and Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2002 Suppl.

(3) SCR 39 .

3. In compliance of the order passed by the revisional Court on 25.01.2023 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate again dismissed the application on the ground that as per the letter received from the Assistant Excise Commissioner for Collector by order dated 18.01.2023, it is revealed that proceedings for confiscation are pending. The said order of confiscation was assailed and learned ASJ by order dated 04.02.2023 dismissed the revision on the ground that intimation has been received from the Collector, therefore, criminal Court has no right to release the vehicle. Hence, this petition.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that on 12.01.2023 when Annexure D order was passed criminal court had not received any information about initiation of the proceedings for confiscation from the Collector. Therefore, criminal Court had full power to release the vehicle on supurdagi. It is the contention of learned counsel that on 25.01.2023 when trial Court passed the order, though intimation was received but the entire matter had to be considered with regard to date of 12.01.2023, as on that date no intimation was received and for the same learned counsel placed reliance on order dated 16.10.2023 passed in the case of Mahesh Vs. State of M.P. by coordinate bench of this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the contention and has contended that on 25.01.2023 when order was passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in compliance of the order passed by the Sessions Court intimation was received, therefore, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has rightly dismissed the application of handing over the vehicle on Supurdagi.

6. To appreciate the rival submissions putforth by learned counsel for the parties, it is apposite to reproduce relevant provisions of section 47-D of the Act, which is reproduced as under:

" 47-D. Bar of jurisdiction of the Court under certain circumstances -

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act, or any other law for the time being in force, the Court having jurisdiction to try offences covered by clause (a) or (b) of su