CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Kundan Kumar vs State Of Bihar And Ors

Patna High Court · Decided on 6 July 2020 · Citation: (2020) 07 PAT CK 0067

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Karol, CJ · S. Kumar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bihar Prohibition And Excise Act, 2016 — Section 30(a), 58 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 451
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 24606 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 390 words

The proceedings of the Court are being conducted through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residence.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

This writ petition has been filed by petitioner to release the cash amount of Rs. 32,000/- which was seized in Islampur P.S. Case No. 277 of 2019 instituted under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is recovery of 14.250 ml of foreign liquor from the maruti car driven by petitioner and Rs. 32,000/- from his pocket and illicit liquor, maruti car and cash were seized by the police under provisions of Excise Act.

A Division Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 19300 of 2018 (Chhedi Mahto Vs. the State of Bihar & Ors) has held that cash seized under Excise Act is not liable for confiscation. The relevant paragraph of the judgment and order is quoted hereinbelow:-

"We have heard learned counsel for the parties and we have perused the materials on record and examined the provisions of Section 58 of 'the Act' which nowhere empowers the Confiscating authority to confiscate any money found in possession of a person charged with an offence under 'the Act'. The order is illegal because cash is not a prohibitory item under 'the Act' and thus could not have been confiscated by the Confiscating authority in purported exercise of power under the said 'Act'."

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 5 in which it is admitted that proposal to confiscate seized maruti car has been made to District Collector but no proposal for confiscation of cash has been recommended by police.

Accordingly, petitioner is directed to file an application before the Special Court (Excise), Nalanda at Biharsharif under Section 451 of Cr.P.C for release of the cash which has been seized by the police in the case as same are not liable for confiscation and as such it is the Special Court (Excise), which can pass an order for interim release of the cash with terms and conditions of release as usually imposed. If any such application is filed by the petitioner same to be disposed of within 30 days from the filing of said application.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of.