Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Addanki Nagaraju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 23 November, 2022
Author: D.Ramesh
Bench: D.Ramesh
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO.12142 OF 2022
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to declare the proceedings in Cr.No.586/2022/SEB/C, dated 04.04.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent thereby dismissing the appeal of the petitioner filed against the confiscation order vide proceedings in Ec.No.69/2022/C2, dated 17.01.2022 passed by the 3rd respondent in connection with Crime No.76 of 2020 stood registered on the file of the 4th respondent under Section 34(a) and 50 (B) (a) of Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 [for short 'the Act'] and also seized the car of the petitioner bearing registration No.AP 37 TE 0008 as arbitrary, illegal and consequently direct the respondents to release the said vehicle from the custody of the 4th respondent.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Government Pleaders appearing for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned proceedings dated 04.04.2022 are contrary to the orders 2 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in G.Nasar Reddy and Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Anr1..
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner is the owner of the subject vehicle and used to run the same for transportation of passengers on fare; though the petitioner has specifically pleaded that he has no knowledge about the commission of the offence and no mens rea in the present case and in fact, in the said crime, the petitioner is not a party, the respondents did not consider the same. Hence, the present writ petition.
5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the orders passed by the appellate authority dated 04.04.2022, the said orders are contrary to the observations made by the Division Bench, wherein this Court interpreted Section 45 and 46 of A.P. Excise Act and held that when the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case has never had knowledge of transportation of liquor bottles by the driver and cleaner and that he was not made a party in the criminal proceedings and in the absence of the said fact, the respondent-state has come to conclusion that the petitioner had knowledge of transportation of the liquor bottles. The finding in our opinion, is bad and far from truth. The authorities 1 2002 (2) ALD Cri 677 3 have arrived at a wrong conclusion without any material when the petitioner had no knowledge of transporting liquor bottles. Accordingly, the court interfered with the proceedings.
6. In view of the above observations of the Division Bench, the proceedings dated 04.04.2022 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the 2nd respondent, directing to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner afresh, in accordance with the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in G.Nasar Reddy and Anr's case [cited supra]. The petitioner is at liberty to file the said judgment before the appellate authority.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
______________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Date: 23.11.2022 Pnr