Smt. Mamta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15200 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Mamta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 May, 2024

Author: Pranay Verma

Bench: Pranay Verma

                                                             1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                                  ON THE 21 st OF MAY, 2024
                                              WRIT PETITION No. 5713 of 2024

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SMT. MAMTA S/O SHRI AVINASH, AGED ABOUT 53
                           YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, ADD: 288, SCHEME
                           NO. 54 F.H., VIJAY NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI PRAKASH CHANDRA SHRIVAS - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH COLLECTOR
                                 DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    SHRIMAN JILA SAHAYAK AABKARI AYUKT, JILA
                                 SAHAYAK ABKARI AAYUKT KARALAYA, INDORE
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    SHRIMAN         POLICE           ADHIKSHAK POLICE
                                 ADHIKSHAK      KARALAYA         INDORE (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           4.    SHRIMAN    THANA     PRABHARI AARAKSHI
                                 KENDRA BETMA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY MRS. GEETANJALI CHAURASIA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                              ORDER

By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.12.2011 [Annexure P/1] passed by the Collector cum District Magistrate, District Indore whereby her vehicle

bearing registration No.MP-09-KB-7250 has been confiscated.

2. It appears that offence punishable under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915 and Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC was registered against accused persons namely; Saket, Ashok Singh and Kailash on the allegation that on 04.12.2010 they were transporting total 10368 bulk liters of illicit liquor in the vehicle on the basis of a forged permit. The vehicle was seized and thereafter proceedings for confiscation of the same was initiated. An intimation as regards the proceeding was communicated to the Court concerned. Eventually, the order dated 23.12.2011 was passed confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner upon recording a finding to the effect that the same has been

found involved in transportation of illicit liquor. Subsequently by judgment dated 29.11.2022 in Sessions Trial No.35/2021 the Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur, District Indore has acquitted the accused of offence for which they had been charged.

3. As per Section 47-A of the Act, 1915 confiscation of the seized articles can be made only if an offence covered under clause (a) or clause (b) of sub section (2) of Section 34 is committed. The sessions Court has already acquitted the accused from the said offence meaning thereby that it has found that the offence as alleged was not committed. The effect of the same would be that the essential requirement of the provision of Section 47-A of the M.P. Excise Act cease to be existing since the pre-requisite of the same is commission of an offence. Since the offence itself has not been found to have been committed, the confiscation of the vehicle also cannot stand.

4. Though the petitioner was not an accused in the criminal case but since she was the owner of the vehicle, it is only she who could challenge the

impugned order of confiscation. As a result of aforesaid discussion, the

impugned order dated 23.12.2011 [Annexure P/1] passed by the Collector cum District Magistrate, District Indore is set aside and the vehicle bearing registration No.MP-09-KB-7250 is directed to be handed over to the petitioner within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

5. Petition is accordingly allowed and disposed off.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE jyoti