Madras High Court
L.Shanmugam vs State Rep. By on 13 August, 2024
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.R.C.No.173 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.R.C.No.173 of 2022
L.Shanmugam ... Petitioner
Vs.
State Rep. by
Inspector of Police,
Prohibition and Enforcement Wing,
Perur, Coimbatore.
(Crime No.792 of 2021). ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Sections 397 & 401 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the order dated
02.12.2021 in C.A.No.156 of 2021 on the file of the learned III Additional
District and Sessions Court, Coimbatore, set aside the same and
consequently set aside the confiscation order passed in
C.No.38/ADSP/CWC/Veh.con/CBE/2021 dated 27.08.2021 directing the
respondent to release the petitioner's vehicle i.e., Scorpio Car bearing
Reg.No.TN-38-AL-5454, Engine No.BS64M73624, Chasis
No.MAITB2BSL72A60996.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuganathan
For Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran,
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
This criminal revision case has been filed to set aside the impugned
order, dated 02.12.2021 in Crl.A.No.156 of 2021 passed by the learned III
Additional District and Sessions, Coimbatore and consequently set aside the
confiscation order passed in C.No.38/ADSP/CWC/Veh.con/CBE/2021,
dated 27.08.2021 directing the respondent Police to confiscate the
petitioner's vehicle i.e., Scorpio Car bearing Reg.No.TN-38-AL-5454,
Engine No.BS64M73624, Chasis No.MAITB2BSL72A60996.
2.Gist of the case is that the petitioner is the accused in Crime No.792
of 2021 which was registered on 14.06.2021 for offence under Sections
4(1)(b), 4(1)(g) & 4(1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act and Sections
269, 271, 291 of IPC and Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897.
The petitioner's vehicle i.e., Scorpio Car bearing Reg.No.TN-38-AL-5454
was intercepted by the respondent Police and searched. During search, illicit
liquor in a white colour plastic can found and seized.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the above case and the vehicle was not used
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
by him for any illegal activity. The case projected by the respondent Police
as per FIR is that when the petitioner's car was intercepted, driver of the car
stopped the vehicle and ran away from the scene of occurrence. On enquiry,
it was found that owner of the car is one Sampath Kumar, son of
Lakshmanan. At the time of search and seizure, the petitioner was affected
with COVID-19 and he was under quarantine. The petitioner's vehicle
seized from his farm house and thereafter, projected that in the vehicle illicit
liquor transported. The petitioner, a Politician, belongs to opposition party,
he used to conduct many Dharna against the undemocratic manner in which
the ruling party functioning using muscle and Police power. Hence, a false
case registered against the petitioner. He further submitted that show cause
notice for confiscation proceedings received by the petitioner on 21.06.2021.
After receipt of notice, the petitioner sent a detailed representation, dated
17.08.2021, but the same not properly considered and confiscation order was
issued on 27.08.2021. Against which, the petitioner preferred an appeal
before the learned III Additional District & Sessions Court, Coimbatore in
Crl.A.No.156 of 2021 and the same was dismissed on 02.12.2021
confirming the confiscation proceedings.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.The primary contention of the petitioner is that the condition under
Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 not followed before
confiscating the petitioner's vehicle. Though the petitioner sent a detailed
reply, the same was not considered by the confiscating authority. The right
of paying confiscated amount and taking back proposed confiscation vehicle
not given to the petitioner. He further submitted that the lower appellate
Court failed to consider the petitioner's contention and without answering
the same, dismissed the appeal. Hence, he prays for setting aside the
impugned judgment.
5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent Police filed counter and submitted that FIR in Crime No.792 of
2021 registered against the petitioner by the respondent Police for offence
under Sections 4(1)(b), 4(1)(g) & 4(1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act,
1937 and Sections 269, 271, 291 of IPC and Section 3 of the Epidemic
Diseases Act, 1897. Thereafter, the Inspector of Police prepared
Observation Mahazar, Rough Sketch in presence of witnesses and also
examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. The petitioner filed
Anticipatory Bail before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.10867 of 2021 and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
same was allowed on 25.06.2021. During the course of investigation, the
Inspector of Police produced seized properties before the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.V, Coimbatore and the same was taken on file as PR.No.175
of 2021 dated 26.07.2021. Thereafter, the Inspector of Police sent the
samples to the Forensic Science Lab, Chennai for chemical analysis and the
report was received on 08.02.2022. On completion of investigation,
Inspector of Police filed charge sheet against the petitioner before the
learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.V, Coimbatore and the same was taken
on file C.C.No.2059 of 2023 and the next date of hearing is 04.09.2024 for
examination of LW1 to LW3.
6.He further submitted that steps taken to proceed the vehicle under
Confiscation and the Additional Superintendent of Police, Prohibition
Enforcement Wing, Coimbatore District initiated confiscation proceeding
under Section 14(4) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 in
C.No.30/ADSP/CWC/Veh.Con/CBE/2021. During proceedings, on
08.08.2021, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Prohibition
Enforcement Wing, Coimbatore served notice to the petitioner. The
confiscation order, dated 27.08.2021 shows that a show cause notice dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
08.08.2021 was sent to the petitioner and his reply was received on
19.08.2021. The contention of the petitioner is that he was not given
opportunity to examine witnesses to establish that he was not involved in the
offence. Thereafter, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Prohibition
Enforcement Wing, Coimbatore passed the confiscation order on
27.08.2021. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed appeal before the
learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore in
Crl.A.No.156 of 2021. He further submitted that the final order passed on
30.10.2021 by the Additional Superintendent of Police, Prohibition
Enforcement Wing, Coimbatore as per Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu
Prohibiton Act, 1937 and the petitioner received the final order on
03.11.2021 and opportunity was given to the petitioner to pay the amount
fixed in the final order within 7 days from the date of the final order. The
petitioner failed to pay the amount and public auction was fixed on
08.12.2021 and vehicle was sold to a third party for a sum of Rs.1,58,120/-
by the auction Committee and amount remitted to government account. As
per Section 14(4)(iii), reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioner to
participate in the confiscation proceedings and the vehicle has been sold by
the confiscation authorities by duly following the procedure contemplated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937. Now the present auction
purchaser started to use the vehicle. The points now raised have already
raised in the appeal and the same was not considered finding no merits.
Hence, he prays for dismissal of the criminal revision case.
7.Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is
seen that in this case, the petitioner is very well participated in the
confiscation proceedings, filed his reply and thereafter not participated in
auction proceedings. Having participated in the confiscation proceedings,
the petitioner should have participated in the auction proceedings, raised his
objection and shown his interest to pay the auction amount to claim his
vehicle. In this case, the petitioner failed to avail such option. The final
order and notice discloses the same. Challenging the confiscation order, the
filed an appeal in Crl.A.No.156 of 2021 and the learned III Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore considered the submissions on
either side and dismissed the appeal finding that the intention of the
petitioner in the appeal is not challenging the confiscation proceedings but
attempting to try a parallel trial creating grounds for the criminal case in
C.C.No.2059 of 2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8.In view of the above, this Court does not find merits consideration
in the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly,
this criminal revision case stands dismissed confirming the impugned order,
dated 02.12.2021 in Crl.A.No.156 of 2021 passed by the learned III
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.
13.08.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
vv2
To
1.The III Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Coimbatore.
2.The Additional Superintendent of Police,
Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Coimbatore.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
13.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
