Telangana High Court
CRLP/14304/2013 of Maloth RAvi Vs The State of AP., on 31 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR Crl.P.No.14304 of 2013 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 r/w 451 Cr.P.C., seeking release of 104 bags of black jaggery each containing 50 Kgs., i.e., 5200 Kgs and 50 Kgs of alum seized in P.R.No. 690 of 2013 of Wardhannapet Prohibition
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.
Arguments
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMARCrl.P.No.14304 of 2013
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 r/w 451Cr.P.C., seeking release of 104 bags of black jaggery each containing 50Kgs., i.e., 5200 Kgs and 50 Kgs of alum seized in P.R.No. 690 of 2013 ofWardhannapet Prohibition and Excise Station, Warangal District, whichcame to be registered for the offence punishable under Section 34(e) ofA.P. Excise Act, 1968.
The allegations in the report would disclose that on21.10.2013 the Prohibition and Excise staff searched the house of thepetitioner and seized 104 bags of black jaggery each containing 50 Kgs.,i.e., 5200 Kgs and 50 Kgs of alum. Basing on the said search andseizure, a case in P.R.No.690 of 2013 came to be registered for theoffence punishable under Section 34(e) of the A. P. Excise Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioneris doing the business of purchase and sale of jaggery and other kiranaitems in the name and style of M/s Priyanka Jagery Merchant atChintapalli, Warangal District and never indulged in any clandestinebusiness.
It is represented by the learned Public Prosecutor thatthough the contraband is in the custody of Excise, but no proceedingswith regard to confiscation of the same are initiated till today.
The petitioner filed an application under section 451 Cr.P.C.,seeking interim custody of the seized property but the same wasreturned by the learned Magistrate on the ground that the said court hasno jurisdiction to release the said property.
Mere possession of jaggery itself is not an offence eitherunder provision of Andhra Pradesh Excise Act or under Andhra PradeshProhibition Act. If the petitioner had knowledge that the materialpurchased from his shop was being used for manufacturing illicit distilledliquor, then the question of releasing the stock in favour of the petitionerwould not arise. In the case on hand, there is no material to show thatthe petitioner had knowledge about the material sold by him was beingused for manufacturing illicit distilled liquor. Further, there is no disputethat the petitioner had licence to deal with the said material. In view ofthe above, I am inclined to release the material in favour of the petitionerprovided the confiscation proceedings are not initiated till date.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and 104 bags ofblack jaggery each containing 50 Kgs i.e., 5200 Kgs and 50 Kgs of alumseized from the petitioner in P.R.No. 690 of 2013 of WardhannapetProhibition and Excise Station, shall be released to the petitioner on hisexecuting a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) withone surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned VII AdditionalJudicial Magistrate of First Class, Thorrur, Warangal District.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. However, this order shall not preclude the authorities in proceedingagainst the petitioner under the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act.
Date: 31.12.2013gvl
-----------------------------------
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J.