Vehicle owner challenged a second show cause notice initiating confiscation of his goods carrier seized in a contraband case, contending the issuing officer lacked Prohibition Officer authority. The court held the notice valid, being a continuation of an earlier notice already adjudged within jurisdiction, and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON PRONOUNCED ON 15.11.2024 06.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. KUMARESH BABU
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD).No.22995 of 2024
Janakiraman … Petitioner
Vs
PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned show cause notice vide C.No. 36-3/CONF/DSP/PEW/VNR/2024 dated 25.09.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondents
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
from continuing the confiscation proceedings in respect of the vehicle bearing Registration N.TN-29-CV-3394 (Model Name – EICHER PRO 2110 H HST – Goods carrier) belongs to the petitioner till the disposal of the case in Crime No.110/ 2024 on the file of the 3rd respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi
For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar for R1 Additional Government Pleader
: Ms.M.Aasha for RR2 & 3 Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The challenge in the Writ Petition is a show cause notice issued by
the second respondent and for a consequential direction to forebear the respondents from continuing the confiscation proceedings of the vehicle belonging to the petitioner.
petitioner, Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the first respondent and Ms.M.Aasha, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing on behalf of the respondents 2 & 3.
2/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
3/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
released. But, however, under the impugned proceedings, the second respondent had confiscated the vehicle without any authority.
deemed to be a Prohibition Officer under the Act for initiation of confiscation proceedings against the petitioner's vehicle. He had also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court to contend that only after the accusations is found to be proved by a Competent Court, the confiscation could be enforced. Therefore, he would seek interference with the orders passed by the respondent and set aside the order of confiscation.
4/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
5/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
been unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner. The petitioner therefore, cannot be heard to say that the second respondent do not have jurisdiction to decide the issue.
6/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
proceedings. Thereafter, the second respondent had issued the present notice impugned herein which is only a continuation of the earlier show cause notice dated 30.05.2024. Without submitting his explanation, the petitioner had again approached this Court raising the very same ground of jurisdiction which was raised by him in the earlier round of litigation.
7/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
directed to submit his explanation on or before 30.01.2025 to the show cause notice impugned in this Writ Petition and thereafter, the second respondent after affording an opportunity of hearing shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with the law. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
06.01.2025
Gba Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No Neutral Citations : Yes/No To
8/9
W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024
K . KUMARESH BABU, J.
Gba
A Pre-Delivery Order in W.P.(MD)No.27084 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD).No.22995 of 2024
06.01.2025
9/9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the DSP, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, is an authorised Prohibition Officer entitled to issue show cause notice and conduct confiscation of the petitioner's vehicle.
Whether confiscation proceedings can proceed in parallel while the criminal case remains pending before the competent court.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Janakiraman
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Commissioner & Secretary, Prohibition & Excise Department
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Virudhunagar
The Inspector of Police, Vachakarapatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District
K. Kumaresh Babu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
