Partly allowed

Rajan Sah v. The State Of Bihar Through The District Magistrate, Sheohar and Ors.

Patna HC6 Oct 2017CR. WJC/1655/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order sealing his shop due to alleged excise violation. High Court stayed confiscation proceedings pending a larger Bench decision and ordered immediate unsealing and release of possession.

What did the court decide?

Stayed confiscation proceedings; ordered immediate unsealing of shop and land; handed over possession to petitioner; restricted disposal or encumbrance without District Magistrate permission.

Rajan Sah Vs The State Of Bihar Through The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1655 of 2017

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- SHEOHAR

¶4

===========================================================

¶5

Rajan Sah, Son of Lakhu Sah, R/o Village - Basant patti, P.S. - Purnahiya, District - Sheohar.

¶6

.... .... Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Sheohar.

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, Sheohar.

¶10

The Excise Superintendent, Sheohar.

¶11

The Officer-In-Charge, Sheohar P.S., District- Sheohar.

¶12

.... .... Respondents

¶13

===========================================================

¶14

Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.

¶15

===========================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT

¶17

Date: 06-10-2017

¶18

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

¶19

The shop and the land on which it situates appertaining

¶20

to Khata No. 93, Kheshra No. 1736, Area 5.11 Dhurs and Khata No. 93, Kheshra No. 1737, Area 12.11 Dhurs of the petitioner has been sealed for violation of the provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 and for the occurrence aforesaid Purnahiya P.S. Case No. 19 of 2016 was registered and thereafter confiscation proceeding has been started.

¶21

The said order is under challenge in this criminal writ petition.

¶22

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issue whether the Executive Authority have power to confiscate and seal the shop and land seized in connection with the

¶23

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1655 of 2017 dt.06-10-2017

¶24

2 /3

¶25

aforesaid case which power, is exercisable only by a Judicial Authority, is sub judice before a large Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 1647 of 2015 ( Baleshwar Roy vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. ). In the circumstances, till the decision of the L.P.A. aforesaid, further proceeding of Confiscation Case No. 17 of 2017 arising out of Purnahiya P.S. Case No. 19 of 2016 may kindly be stayed and the shop and land be put in possession of the petitioner by way of interim measure.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in a case of Smt. Manorama Devi @ Manorma Devi vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (Cr.W.J.C. No. 605 of 2016) relevant part whereof is reproduced hereinbelow:

¶27

“Learned counsel for the petitioner confines to the prayer made in this writ petition to unsealing residential premises of the petitioner, from where allegedly a few bottles of liquor were recovered less than one month after the notification was issued on 05.04.2016.

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances and considering the various orders that have been passed in various cases, we direct that the premises of the petitioner be unsealed without prejudice to the State in respect of any other matter which would be disposed of in accordance with law.”

¶29

Since the authority of the confiscation officer is under challenge before a Larger Bench of this Court in the referred L.P.A., it

¶30

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1655 of 2017 dt.06-10-2017

¶31

3 /3

¶32

is directed that operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed till disposal of the L.P.A. aforesaid and shall be subject to the result of the L.P.A. aforesaid.

¶33

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the respondents immediately unseal the shop and release the land of the petitioner and hand over its possession to the petitioner, subject to the final result of L.P.A. with condition that the petitioner shall not dispose of the said shop and land or put under encumbrances without permission of the District Magistrate, Sheohar.

¶34

With the aforesaid observation, this writ application stands disposed of.

¶35

(Birendra Kumar, J)

¶36

Kundan/-

¶37

AFR/NAFR	N.A.
CAV DATE	N.A.
UploadingDate	09.10.2017
Transmission
Date	09.10.2017

Rajan Sah v. The State Of Bihar Through The District Magistrate, Sheohar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Sah v. The State Of Bihar Through The District Magistrate, Sheohar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhotu Singh @ Bablu Kumar @ Sushil Kumar Singh Vs State Of Bihar Through Colletor, Patna and Anr.

Raj Kumar Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Prohibition, Excise And Registra

Shadev Ravidas @ Sahdev Ravidas Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Registration Excise And Prohibition Department

Most. Parwati Devi Vs The State Of Bihar Through Secretary, Excise Department, Bihar, Patna and Ors.

Ashok Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Excise Department and Ors.

Chandra Rawat @ Chandar Rawat Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise And Registration Department