Chattisgarh High Court
Anil Kumar Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 February, 2023
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 233 of 2023
Anil Kumar Gupta, S/o Narayan Prasad Gupta, Aged About 56
Years, R/o House No. 24, Gudi Chowk, Halwai Khapri, Police
Station Baloda Bazar, District Baloda bazar, Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Superintendent Of Police,
Kabirdham, District Kawardha, Chhattisgarh.
2. Collector Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
3. Station House Officer, Police Station Kukdur, District Kabirdham,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. C. R. Sahu, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. M Asha, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 02.02.2023 Heard.
1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for releasing the Vehicle Mahindra Car TUV 300 bearing Registration No.CG 22 G 7457, which has been confiscated by the Police Station Kukdur, District Kabirdham (C.G.), by the order of the Collector District Kabirdham in Case No.53B-21/2019 dated 21.10.2022, on Supurdnama.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the Collector is bad in law, as the police has wrongly seized the said vehicle and the petitioner has not been made accused in the said case and the petitioner is the registered owner of the said vehicle, thus, prays to allow the petition and release the vehicle on Supurdnama.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that against the order passed by the Collector, there is a remedy for appeal, which is provided under Section 47-B of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act 1915 (for short the Act of 1915), thus the present petition is not tenable and deserves to be dismissed.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case carefully.
5. In the Act of 1915, a mechanism has been provided against the confiscation order for the appeal under Section 47-B of the Act, 1915, and the State counsel submits that as per Section 62 sub- section 2(c) of the Act 1915, has already framed the Rules related to appeal and review, through which against the order passed by the Collector an appeal lies to the Excise Commissioner as an appellate authority to hear such appeal and the same issue also came up before the co-ordinate bench in the matter of Ranjit Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Chhattisgarh in Writ Petition Criminal No.604 of 2018 on 29.01.2019, in which it has been held that when the alternate remedy is available, the petition is not maintainable.
6. In view of the aforesaid discussions, this petition is not tenable and is hereby dismissed, as such, at motion stage itself.
7. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the order to the petitioner, after obtaining photocopy of the same.
Sd/-
(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Deepti Jha