Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Cr.P.C. assailing the order dated 8-6-2021 , passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund in Criminal Revision No. 14 of 2021, affirming the order dated 17-5-2021 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Basna, District Mahasamund in M.J.C. No. 46/2021 rejecting the petitioner's application filed under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. for Supurdnama of the Goods Vehicle (Truck) bearing registration No. CG-06-GP-1067.

2. The facts as projected by the petitioner in the instant petition, in brief, are that the petitioner is the owner of Goods Vehicle No. CG- 06-GP-1067. The said vehicle was seized by the Police of Police Station, Basna in connection with Crime No. 227/2021 under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915. The allegation of the prosecution is that 16.200 bulk liters of country made liquor was being transported through the said vehicle driven by the truck driver. The petitioner filed an application under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Basna on 17-5- 2021 inter alia stating that he is the owner of the aforesaid vehicle, therefore, custody of the vehicle be given to him on Supurdnama, which was rejected by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Basna as there is provision of confiscation of the vehicle under Section 34 (3) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915.

3. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Basna while rejecting the application under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. has recorded a finding that as per the case diary, the vehicle was seized on 6.5.2021 and confiscation proceedings on the strength of the application submitted by Police Station, Basna have been initiated. The Superintendent of Police, Mahasamund has requested for confiscation of the vehicle to the District Magistrate, Mahasamund, as such, the proceedings for confiscation are pending, therefore, the application is liable to be rejected and accordingly he has rejected the same. The petitioner filed a revision petition before the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Saraypali assailing the said order who after considering the fact that the Superintendent of Police has already initiated the confiscation proceedings as provided under Section 34 (3) of the CG Excise Act, 1915 before the learned District Magistrate, Mahasamund and the finding recorded by the learned Magistrate, First Class is legal and justified. Therefore, learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Saraypali dismissed the criminal revision vide impugned order dated 8-6-2021

12. Before parting with the case, I would observe that as reflected in the orders, the proceedings of confiscation have already been commenced by the District Magistrate, Mahasamund and the vehicle can be given on interim supuradnama by the District Magistrate, Mahasamund considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, which has also been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of General Insurance Council and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others reported in (2010) 6 SCC 768 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has given direction with regard to seized vehicle and held as under :-

13. The petitioner is at liberty to file an application for interim Supuradnama before the learned District Magistrate, Mahasamund and in-turn the learned District Magistrate, Mahasamund in the eventuality of filing of the application for grant of Supuradnama of the vehicle, will consider and decide the same without being influenced by any of the observations made by the learned District Judge or the Magistrate First Class in accordance with law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra) & General Insurance Council and others (Supra).