Rajasthan High Court
CRLMP/685/1998 of DHANNA RAM Vs STATE on 20 January 1999
MISC. PETITION NO. 685/1998 Date : 20.04.2005 HON'BLE MR. B. PRASAD, J. Mr. H.R. Soni, P.P. Mr. R.K. Rathi for the respondents. = = = = = Heard. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State candidly acepted that he is not in a position to inform the Court whether there was any assessment or
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 685/1998
Date : 20.04.2005
HON'BLE MR. B. PRASAD, J.
Mr. H.R. Soni, P.P.Mr. R.K. Rathi for the respondents.
= = = = =
Heard.
Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State candidly aceptedthat he is not in a position to inform the Court whether there was any assessment ornot. Apart from this, learned Public Prosecutor is not in a position to tell the Courtwhether there was any due tax against the respondents. In absence of these twofacts, it is not possible to ascertain whether any amount of tax was ever due againstthe respondents. If there was no tax liability, then there was no question ofseizure of the vehicle. The seizure by itself in absence of the above two factsappears to be uncalled for. If the trial court has released the vehicle in favour ofthe respondents, no illegality is seen. The misc. petition having no force is herebydismissed.
(B. PRASAD), J.
bjsh.