Dr. Kevala Prasad vs State Of U.P. Thru'Secry. Excise ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 5291 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 767 of 2013
 

 
Petitioner :- Dr. Kevala Prasad
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru'Secry. Excise And Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- M.R. Gupta
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.

This writ petition is directed against the order of the District Judge, Jaunpur dated 10.05.2013 whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act has been partly allowed and a direction has been issued to the effect that if the petitioner so desire, he may get the vehicle released in terms of the provisions of Section 72(2) of the U.P. Excise Act. The petitioner is not satisfied. It is his case that the vehicle was seized on the alleged charge of liquor being transported therein. A criminal case was instituted against the driver and the alleged owner of the illicit liquor namely the brother of the petitioner being O.T. No. 115 of 2003. In the criminal case the brother of the petitioner and the driver have been acquitted. He, therefore, submits that the story of prosecution i.e. the vehicle was used as a carrier for illicit liquor must fall.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present writ petition.

The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is wholly misconceived.

Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act deals with the seizure of vehicle carrying illicit liquor and or otherwise involved in an offence under the U.P. Excise Act. Even if the accused is acquitted of the criminal charge under the Excise Act for want of evidence against him, the seizure of the vehicle is not adversely effected as has been laid down in the case of Prem Nath Arora vs. State Respondents reported in Cr.L.J. 1997, 573.

The District Judge appears to be correct in recording a finding that in the facts of the case seizure of the vehicle for an offence under Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act cannot be faulted with. He has rightly provided that if the petitioner so desires, may get the vehicle released under Section 72 (2) of the U.P. Excise Act after deposit of the price of the vehicle. There is no illegality in the order of the District Judge so as to warrant any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Writ petition is dismissed.

Dated :30.08.2013

VR/Writ Tax No. 767 of 2013.