Disposed

Ram Sajiwan Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Transport Lucknow and Ors.

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2024WRIC/77/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the District Magistrate's confiscation of a vehicle found transporting rectified spirit under the U.P. Excise Act. Court did not interfere with the impugned orders but disposed of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek release of the vehicle before the competent criminal court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to seek release of vehicle from competent court, which shall decide on merits expeditiously.

Ram Sajiwan Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Transport Lucknow and Ors. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:22244

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 77 of 2020

¶4

Petitioner :- Ram Sajiwan Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Transport Lucknow And Ors.

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Sahu Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶7

Heard Ms. Sonal Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Shri Manoj Sahu, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶8

The petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.08.2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Bahraich in exercise of powers under Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 thereby confiscating the vehicle owned by the petitioner, namely, Black Bolero No. U.P.45 B/5200 on the ground that the said vehicle was intercepted on 19.05.2017 by the S.H.O., Police Station Nanpara District Bahraich and on search it was found to be carrying 325 liters of rectified spirit.

¶9

On account of the aforesaid facts, first information report was also lodged in Case Crime No. 1074 of 2017, under Sections 60, 63 and 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and also under Sections 272/273 IPC. The District Magistrate, Bahraich, in the aforesaid circumstances, was of the view that it could not be demonstrated that the driver of the vehicle was aware that the vehicle was carrying illicit liquor and also that prima facie, the vehicle was involved in transporting the illicit liquor and hence, passed an order for confiscation of the said vehicle and in alternative, the petitioner was given liberty to deposit a penalty

¶10

of an equivalent amount of value of the vehicle for its release.

¶11

Aggrieved by the order dated 29.08.2019, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority and the appellate authority was also of the view that there is no denial of the fact that the petitioner, who was the owner of the said vehicle, had in fact engaged the driver for carrying of goods while on the other hand, the driver had carried illicit liquor, which was recovered from the said vehicle, consequently, he was of the view that prima facie, the offence is made out and accordingly, benefit of Section 72 (5) of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 could not be granted and rejected the appeal.

¶12

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that now the cognizance of the said case has been taken by the competent criminal court where the prosecution is pending and the petitioner may be granted liberty to move and appropriate application before the court concerned seeking the release of the said vehicle.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel does not oppose prayer made by the petitioner.

¶14

In light of the above, without interfering with the impugned orders, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the competent court for release of the said vehicle. On such an application being moved, the competent court shall proceed and decide the matters on merits without being prejudiced by the impugned orders expeditiously.

¶15

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this petition is disposed of.

¶16

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 13.3.2024 Virendra

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Sajiwan Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Transport Lucknow and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sajiwan Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Transport Lucknow and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kartikeya Verma @ Rahul Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Collector Lakhimpur Kheri and 2 Others

Hem Kant Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Social Welfare Lko. and 6 Others

Raj Nath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Public Works Deptt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and 4 Others

State of U.P. Vs Smt. Indu Pratha Kumari

Ram Manohar Singh Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ayodhya and 5 Others

Aslam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others