Allowed

Parmindar Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Jul 2019CWJC/8900/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted liberty to challenge the confiscation order of a pick-up van seized in an excise case. It provisionally released the vehicle subject to furnishing ownership documents, a surety, a bank guarantee or property deed, and providing specific undertakings pending an appeal.

What did the court decide?

Provisional release of the pick-up van allowed on production of ownership registration, a Bank Guarantee, and specific undertakings to produce the vehicle before authority if required.

Parmindar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8900 of 2019

¶2

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

¶3

Parmindar Kumar Son of Krishna Ballabh Prasad Singh Resident of Village/ Muhalla- vadhsani(Tungi), P.S. Hisua, District- Nawada. At present- Ram Mohini Chowk N.H- 31 Gulab Bag, P.S. Sadar, District- Purnea.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Excise Department at Patna.

¶7

The Divisional Commissioner, Excise Department Patna Division at Patna.

¶8

The District Collector, Purnea.

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, Purnia.

¶10

The Officer-in- Charge Sadar (Purnea) Police Station.

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance :

¶14

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjiv Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar (Sc11)

¶15

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN)

¶16

Date : 12-07-2019

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶18

This application has been filed seeking provisional release of the Pick-up van bearing registration No. BR11S2658 seized in connection with Confiscation Excise Case No. Sadar (Purnea) P.S. Case No. 442 of 2016 registered under sections 272, and 273 and section 30 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶19

Apart from a prayer for release of the vehicle the petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Purnea in Confiscation Excise Case No. 59 of 2017 by which a direction to confiscate the vehicle has been passed by the District Magistrate, Purnea being the Confiscating Authority.

¶20

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that for recovery of 111 liters of IMFL from the vehicle in question that the

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.8900 of 2019 dt.12-07-2019 2/4

¶22

vehicle has been confiscated. It is stated that for the present he would not be pressing the relief for quashing of the order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Purnea in Confiscation Excise Case No. 59 of 2017 he, however, submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to challenge the confiscation order in an appropriate jurisdiction by filing an appeal before the Commissioner within a period of 30 days from today.

¶23

In the circumstance noted where final orders have been passed in the confiscation proceedings, we grant liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order of confiscation before the appellate authority within a period of 30 days from today. In case such an appeal is preferred within the aforesaid period together with an application for condonation of delay, the appellate authority shall consider the same keeping in mind that the petitioner was prosecuting his remedy before this Court and the appeal shall be heard on its own merit and disposed of expeditiously.

¶24

Learned Counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that because the appellate authority has no power to pass an interim order of release, he would press this application for a provisional release of the vehicle in question.

¶25

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that 111 liters of IMFL has been seized; the vehicle is lying under open sky in the Police Station during last one year and if the release is not allowed, it would turn into a junk. He submits that the State is not going to gain by the vehicle turning junk. Learned Counsel further submits that the petitioner is willing to provide such surety and undertakings which may be required to protect the interest of the petitioner as well the State, during the pendency of the appeal.

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.8900 of 2019 dt.12-07-2019 3/4

¶27

Learned Counsel for the State is present and submits that in the given facts and circumstances of this case if at all the Court is willing to consider provisional release of the vehicle then interest of the State is required to be protected.

¶28

Bearing note of the order of release passed in similar circumstance in C.W.J.C. No. 8513 of 2018 whereby a provisional release has been allowed during the pendency of appeal subject to conditions imposed to protect the interest of the State, we take a similar view in the present case as well.

¶29

Let 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 District Magistrate, Purnea with one surety along with a Bank Guarantee or original title deed of immovable property situated within the district to the extent of the value of the vehicle as indicated in the insurance document.

¶30

The petitioner while submitting the surety bond shall also furnish the following affidavits/undertakings:-

¶31

(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.

¶32

(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 appeal and shall not alienate the vehicle during this period.

¶33

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

¶34

(iv) Prior to release of the vehicle a Panchnama would be got prepared by the confiscating authority wherein the

¶35

Patna High Court CWJC No.8900 of 2019 dt.12-07-2019 4/4

¶36

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 undertake not to challenge the said Panchanama in course of trial.

¶37

If the petitioner fails to present an appeal within 30 days as given above, the order of provisional release shall stand withdrawn and the Confiscating Authority shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

¶38

The release shall be allowed within a period of 14 days from the date of submission of the sureties along with the undertakings as stated above. This release would, however, be subject to the order passed in appeal.

¶39

The writ petition is allowed with the directions/observations above.

¶40

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶41

( Partha Sarthy, J)

¶42

Prakash/Sushma

¶43

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	26.07.2019
Transmission Date

Parmindar Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmindar Kumar v. The State of Bihar

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

Prabhat Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Mani Kant Panjiyara Vs The State of Bihar

Munindar Tripathi Vs The State of Bihar

Rouki Singh @ Rouki Kumar Singh, Vs The State of Bihar

Abhay Institute of Medical Science, Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Kumar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar