Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prashant Kumar Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 September, 2025
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23798
1 MCRC-7732-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 24th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7732 of 2025
PRASHANT KUMAR VERMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Rajmani Bansal - Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Ekta Vyas - Panel Lawyer for the State.
ORDER
The present application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (Section 528 of the BNSS), has been preferred seeking
quashment of the order dated 04.02.2025 passed by Collector, Gwalior
whereby in compliance of the order dated 06.05.2024 passed by the
Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Criminal Revision No.39 of 2012, an
application preferred by the applicant under Section 451 and 457 of CrPC
was rejected.
Short facts of the case are that the vehicle of the applicant bearing
Registration No.MP-07-L- 6646 was intercepted by the Police near Sikroda
Highway, and upon search, 765.5 bulk liters of country-made liquor were
allegedly seized. Consequently, an FIR bearing Crime No.182/2020 was
registered against the applicant. On the basis of the said FIR, respondent
No.2 initiated proceedings and passed an order of confiscation of the vehicle
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23798
2 MCRC-7732-2025
in question, without appreciating the fact that the said vehicle was duly
covered by a valid permit for transportation of liquor.
Being aggrieved by the said confiscation order, the applicant preferred
a Revision Petition before the Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, wherein
the order of confiscation passed by respondent no.2 was set aside, with a
direction to the applicant to move an application under Sections 451 and 457
of the Cr.P.C., 1973 before respondent No.2. In compliance with the
aforesaid directions, the applicant again approached respondent No.2 by
filing the application under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C, which was
dismissed by the respondent No.2/Collector. Hence, the present petition.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted before this Court that
the vehicle in question cannot be confiscated during the pendency of trial
arising out of Crime No.182/2020 for the offence under Section 47-A(3) of
the Excise Act. It is further submitted that the issue has already been decided
by the Full Bench in W.P No.11356/2024 (Ramlal Jhariya Vs. State of M.P
& Others) and other connected matters by judgment dated 21.04.2025,
whereby Full Bench has declared Section 47-A of M. P. Excise Act ultra-
vires being violative of Article 300-A and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of
India by observing as under:
"96. Therefore, the questions referred to us in the
matter of jurisdiction to pass confiscation order during
pendency of criminal proceedings under M.P. Excise Act,
1915 and Cow Progeny Act are answered in the following
manner :
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23798
3 MCRC-7732-2025
A. Section 47-A of M.P. Excise Act conferring
authority on the Collector to pass order for confiscation is
declared ultra vires being disproportionately violative of
Articles 19(1)(g) and 300-A of the Constitution of India.
Therefore, question of confiscation by the Collector during
pendency of criminal trial no longer survives in the matter, as
order for confiscation can now be passed only by the
Criminal Court trying the offence in terms of sections 46 and
47 thereof. As a necessary consequence thereto, Section 47-
D would become inoperative in all cases where confiscation
orders have not been passed as yet, having rendered
superfluous.
B. For cases under Cow Progeny Act,
the Collector/District Magistrate shall be competent to
initiate proceedings for confiscation during pendency of
criminal trial, but no confiscation order can be passed before
conclusion of criminal trial and the
Collector/District Magistrate would be empowered to
confiscate the vehicle only if conviction is recorded in
criminal trial and involvement of vehicle and
knowledge/connivance of the owner is proved in the criminal
trial.
C. Writ petition is maintainable once an order is passed
by the Collector/District Magistrate confiscating the vehicles
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23798
4 MCRC-7732-2025
by exercising powers under the provisions of M.P. Excise
Act, 1915 and in case of Cow Progeny Act, if it is passed
before conclusion of trial, because it will be without
jurisdiction."
State counsel has fairly submits that the matter is squarely covered by
the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ramlal Jhariya (supra)
and the authorities were having no jurisdiction to pass the confiscation order
pending criminal case.
Under these circumstances, the orders impugned being unsustainable
are hereby quashed. The applicant is at liberty to move an appropriate
application regarding Supurdginama of the vehicle in question before the
competent Court.
The petition stands allowed and disposed of finally. No order as to
costs.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*
