Allowed

E. Mahender Reddy, v. The Dy. Commissioner of Proh. and Excise

Telangana HC20 Sept 2010CRLRC/1651/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the revision and directed the release of an auto-rickshaw seized for transporting contraband liquor, overriding the Excise Act's bar on jurisdiction under Section 31 of the Prohibition Act, subject to the furnishing of security.

What did the court decide?

Release of auto-rickshaw bearing Registration No. A.P.24.W.9256 on interim custody conditioned upon furnishing security of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like sum each and providing an undertaking no

E. Mahender Reddy, Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Proh. and… — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1651 of 2010

¶3

DATED: 20-09-2010

¶4

ORDER:-

¶5

Petitioner, who was unsuccessful in getting the vehicle-Auto rickshaw bearing No.A.P.24.W.9256 released in Crl.M.P.No.3019 of 2010 in P.R.No.802/2010-11, filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C., before the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Prohibition & Excise), Khammam, filed the present Criminal Revision Case.

¶6

2. Petitioner herein is the owner of the said vehicle and the Station House Officer, Prohibition & Excise police station, Khammam found the auto carrying some contraband liquor and registered a case in P.R.No.802/2010-11 under Section 7 (A) read with Section 8 (e) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 on 14-08-2010 and seized the same. As the petitioner is eking out his livelihood on plying the said auto, he approached the learned Magistrate and filed an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C., requesting the Court for interim custody of the said vehicle. However, by docket order, dated 24-082010, the Court below refused to release the said vehicle stating that in view of

¶7

Section 13(e) of the Act there is a bar of jurisdiction to entertain the said application and hence, the vehicle cannot be released.

¶8

3. Having regard to the judgments passed by this Court in P.SWARUPA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH^[1] , JITENDRA PALNITKER v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH^[2] and

¶9

SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI v. STATE OF GUJARAT^[3] , though Section 46 E of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act states that there is a bar of jurisdiction to entertain any application pertaining to release of the vehicle, Section 31 of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 has an overriding effect over the A.P. Excise Act. In the light of the said provision of law, it shall be held that the learned Magistrate is empowered to pass orders under Section 451 Cr.P.C. and release the vehicle by way of interim custody.

¶10

4. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed, at the stage of admission, with a direction to the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Prohibition & Excise), Khammam to release the auto bearing Registration No.A.P.24.W.9256 seized in P.R.No.802/2010-11 of Prohibition & Excise police station, Khammam, on condition of the petitioner furnishing security in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Prohibition & Excise), Khammam. Further, petitioner shall give an undertaking that he shall not alienate the said vehicle and shall produce the same as and when required in connection with the said crime.

¶11

________________________________

¶12

GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J

¶13

20^th September 2010 TSY

¶14

[1] 1996 (1) ALT Crl. 130 [2] 1995 (3) ALD 80 [3] (2002) 10 SCC 283

E. Mahender Reddy, v. The Dy. Commissioner of Proh. and Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E. Mahender Reddy, v. The Dy. Commissioner of Proh. and Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ch. Venkateswarlu Vs Sri Guru Vara Kumar

P.R.Srinivasulu, Vs State of Andhra pradesh through P.p. High Court of A.P.

Mr.N.Ashok Kumar Vs Damodar Financial Services,4-B,Mayfair Apartments

Anumula Sunitha Reddy Vs Badrinarayana

N.a.Raghu, Vs The State of A.P.

B.v.Subba Rao, Vs Gem Granites Pvt. Limited,78