M/S. Madanlal Yashpal vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 21 January, 2011
Shri Bohra tried to impress upon this Court that the
search in this case was conducted under Section 47 of the
Rajasthan Excise Act as the vehicle from which the recovery
was effected is covered under the definition of place by virtue
of the amendment brought about in Section 3(19) Cr.P.C. in
the year 2007. The said argument though appears attractive at
first sight but is apparently fallacious. Section 47 clearly
envisages that whenever an authorised officer of the Excise
Department has reason to believe that an offence punishable
under this Act has been, or is being or is likely to be
committed "in any place", then he has the authority to "enter
and search" such place at any time by day or night without
procuring a search warrant. The scope of Section is specifically
restricted to "entry and search from inside a place". Since the
recovery in the case at hand was effected from a two wheeler
owned by the petitioner, at a road being a public place,
obviously it is not a situation wherein the seizing Constable
8
S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. II BAIL APPLICATION NO.8109/2014
(Nemichand Vs. State of Rajasthan)
entered into a place as defined under Section 3(19) of the Act
and effected the search and seizure. As it is not a case
involving seizure being made after entering into a place, the
provisions of Section 45 would apply and not those of Section