Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Ejarla Badarinath on 28 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
***
Crl.P.No.8470 of 2022
Between:
# The State of Andhra Pradesh
Through the Inspector of Police,
Special Enforcement Bureau, Gooty,
Represented by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
... Petitioner
AND
$ Ejarla Badarinath,
S/o. Subbaiah, aged 71 years,
R/o.D.No.4-154, SLN Temple Street,
Pamidi Town, Ananthapuramu District.
... Respondent
Date of Judgment pronounced on : 28-11-2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No
May be allowed to see the judgments?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No
to Law Reporters/Journals:
3. Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No
Of the Judgment?
2
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
* HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
+ Crl.P.No.8470 of 2022
Date:28-11-2022
Between:
# The State of Andhra Pradesh
Through the Inspector of Police,
Special Enforcement Bureau, Gooty,
Represented by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
... Petitioner
AND
$ Ejarla Badarinath,
S/o. Subbaiah, aged 71 years,
R/o.D.No.4-154, SLN Temple Street,
Pamidi Town, Ananthapuramu District.
... Respondent
! Counsel for petitioner : Learned Public Prosecutor
^Counsel for Respondent : No appearance
<GIST :
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred:
1
2014 13 SCC 100
2
2020 12 SCC 733
3
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8470 of 2022
ORDER:
Crime No.128 of 2022 was registered at SEB
Station, Gooty against some accused persons for illicit
distillation of liquor. On the basis of the
statement/confession given by accused No.1 in the case,
about 3000 kgs of Black Jaggery and 60 kg of White Jaggery
were seized from the respondent/accused No.2. Thereupon,
the respondent had approached the Magistrate for release of
the said seized Jaggery by way of Crl.M.P.No.255 of 2022,
under Section 451 of Cr.P.C and the same was allowed on
21.07.2022.
2. Aggrieved by the said order of Crl.R.P.No.36 of
2022 was filed before the VI Additional Sessions Court,
Ananthapuramu. This petition was dismissed on 20.09.2022.
Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal the State has
approached this Court by way of the present Criminal
Petition.
3. The issue raised in the present case is whether
the Magistrate had jurisdiction to consider an application for
release of Jaggery. The learned Public Prosecutor relies upon
Section 13(E) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act which
reads as follows: -
" Bar of Jurisdiction - Notwithstanding anything
contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(Central Act 2 of 1974) when the Deputy
Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise or the
appellate authority is seized with the matter under
this Act, no court shall entertain any application
in respect of excisable articles, any package,
covering, receptacle, any animal, vehicle or
other conveyance used in carrying such articles
as far as its release, confiscation is concerned
and the jurisdiction of the Deputy
Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise or the
appellate authority with regard to the disposed of
the same shall be exclusive."
4. It is the contention of the learned Public
Prosecutor that the said provision clearly bars any
application for release of Jaggery being filed before the
Jurisdictional Magistrate. He relies upon the Judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State (NCT of
Delhi) Vs. Narender1, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Uday
Singh2 and the order in S.L.P.(Crl).No.3061 of 2010.
2014 13 SCC 100
2020 12 SCC 733
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State (NCT
of Delhi) Vs. Narender, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Uday
Singh had held that where ever a bar is engrafted prohibiting
the filing of applications in special statutes, before a regular
Magistrate, such applications cannot be maintained.
7. The question before this Court is whether there is
such a bar for release of Jaggery, which is said to be the raw
material which is used for illicit distillation of liquor.
8. The language in Section 13(E) bars applications
in respect of liquor and any receptacle, package, vehicle or
other conveyance used for carrying such liquor. It is clear
that it is only transport of liquor which attracts the provisions
of Section-13(E) and the same cannot be extended to
transport or storage of raw material used for manufacture of
such liquor.
9. In the circumstances, the bar under Section-13(E)
is not available and the Magistrate can consider applications
for release of Jaggery which is at best a raw material used for
illicit distillation of liquor.
10. In the circumstances, this Court does not find
any error in law or fact for any intervention to be carried out
by this Court.
11. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if
any, shall stand closed.
____________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
28.11.2022
BSM
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8470 of 2022
28-11-2022
BSM
