Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

06.02.2024 Heard Ms. Ritika Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents/State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the order dated 10.01.2024 and further be pleased to order for grant of interim custody of seized Scooty bearing registration No. CG-22-X-4145 in favour of petitioner with key.

10.2 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 10.01.2024 passed by the respondent No. 2/ Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), whereby application filed by the petitioner for grant of interim custody of the vehicle i.e. Hero Pleasure Scooty (for short, ‘vehicle’) bearing registration No. CG-22-X-4145. She further submitted that the said vehicle has been seized by the Police of Police Station, City Kotwali, Balodabazar in connection with Crime No. 310/2023 registered against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 (for short, ‘Act of 1915’) on the allegation of transportation of 5.760 bulk liters country made liquor on 14.05.2023.

4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was arrested in connection with the aforesaid crime and thereafter, the petitioner applied for grant of bail and he has been granted bail and upon completion of investigation, the Station House OfÏcer, Police Station, City Kotwali, Balodabazar has submitted the final report before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balodabazar on 02.07.2023. She also submits that on 11.12.2023, the respondent No. 2 issued show-cause notice, whereby proposed for confiscation of the seized vehicle of the petitioner and directed the petitioner to file representation against the proposal for confiscation of seized vehicle. After receiving the show-cause notice, the petitioner preferred an application under Section 47-A(2) of the Act of 1915 for supurdnama of the seized vehicle and vide impugned order dated 10.01.2024, the respondent No. 2 rejected the supurdnama application filed by the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is registered owner of the said vehicle and the said vehicle is kept in stationed condition since 14.05.2023, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the vehicle in such condition and without caring the same, being machinery item, by passage of time, it would get damaged. Hence, the same may be handed over to the petitioner on supurdnama.

6. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the prayers and pleadings made in the writ petition along with the annexures annexed in this case.

8. The confiscation proceeding under the Act of 1915 is governed by Section 47-A(3) of the Act of 1915. Section 47-A(2) of the Act of 1915 regulates the power and procedure to be adopted for confiscation. Perusal of sub-section (2) of the above Act of 1915, would show that power has been given to the District Magistrate (Collector) upon production of the article and on having satisfied that offence covered under clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 34 has been committed and if liquor is more than 5 bulk liters, he may order for confiscation of articles, intoxicants, implements, utensils including the conveyance so seized. It also provides that he during pendency of the proceeding may pass an order of interim nature for custody, disposal etc. of the confiscated intoxicants, articles, imple