Allowed

Jay prakash Kumar v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC9 Apr 2019CWJC/5219/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner sought provisional release of a motorcycle seized for excise violations. The court ordered the release of the vehicle on production of ownership papers, furnishing two sureties, submitting affidavits, and securing a Panchanama, subject to the initiation of confiscation proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Provisional release of the seized motorcycle on submission of sureties, affidavits, and a Panchanama within 14 days.

Jay prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5219 of 2019

¶2

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

¶3

Jay prakash Kumar aged about 29 yers S/o Vinod Kumar Vill.-Jolha Tetariya,Helthdoher P.s.-Pratapur, Distt.-Chatra (Jharkhand)

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Registration Excise and Prohibition Department of Bihar, Patna

¶7

The District Magistrate Gaya

¶8

The Superintend of Excise Gaya

¶9

The S.H.O. of Guraru P.s.- Gaya

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

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

¶12

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vivek Prasad (GP7)

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN)

¶15

Date : 09-04-2019

¶16

None appears for the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the State is present.

¶17

The prayer of the petitioner is for provisional release of the Hero Glamour Motorcycle bearing Registration No. JH13B-4448, which has been seized in connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 161 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶18

Learned counsel for the State informs that seizure list reflects seizure of 40 liters of Mahua liquor. He further informs

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.5219 of 2019 dt.09-04-2019 2/3

¶20

that there is pleading to the effect that the confiscation proceeding has not yet been initiated.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the State and taking note of the nature of seizure made as well as the fact that the confiscation proceeding is yet to be initiated, we direct that the vehicle in question be released provisionally in favour of the petitioner on production of ownership and registration with respect to vehicle in question in his name before the designated court below with two sureties (one local) to the extent of the value of the vehicle as indicated in the insurance document. The petitioner while submitting the sureties shall also furnish the following affidavits/undertakings:

¶22

(i) That the vehicle in question has never been involved in any offence of similar nature in past and shall not indulge in similar offence in future.

¶23

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in creating any third party right or interest in respect of the vehicle during the pendency of the confiscation proceeding, as and when initiated, and shall not alienate the vehicle during this period.

¶24

(iii) The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking to produce the vehicle before the confiscating authority as and

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.5219 of 2019 dt.09-04-2019 3/3

¶26

when required.

¶27

(iv) Prior to release of the vehicle, the Court below would got prepared a Panchanama wherein the photograph of the vehicle shall be taken and will be certified by the petitioner and the same shall be kept on record so that in future if so required, it may be used as a secondary evidence. The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking not to challenge the said Panchanama in course of trial.

¶28

The release shall be allowed within a period of 14 days from the date of submission of the sureties and the undertakings as stated above. This release of the vehicle would, however, be subject to initiation and finalization of the confiscation proceeding.

¶29

With the observations/directions above, this writ petition is allowed.

¶30

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶31

( Arvind Srivastava, J)

¶32

mcv/-

¶33

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	17.04.2019
Transmission Date	NA

Jay prakash Kumar v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay prakash Kumar v. The State of Bihar 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

Mr. Vikesh Vs The State of Bihar

Guddu Nonia Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ramsagar Ram Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Yogendra Mahto Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Sandeep Jaiswal @ Sanjeev Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandan @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.