Seizure of ethanol under Bombay Prohibition Act found unlawful; goods ordered released due to abuse of excise powers.

Seizure of ethanol consignments under the Bombay Prohibition Act was challenged on grounds of abuse of power and lack of jurisdiction; the officials acted not bona fide and contrary to prior binding judicial directions, warranting immediate release of the goods. The reasoning emphasises that statutory seizure powers carry an onerous duty to be exercised with caution and in public interest, and that acting to serve private interests or without verification of materials renders the action illegal and liable to be set aside. The department was directed to release the seized goods forthwith and the petition was disposed on that basis.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment addresses the seizure of goods by State Excise Authorities, challenges the legality of the seizure, and examines the involvement of intervenors in supporting the seizure.

Seizure of Goods:
The petition challenges the seizure of goods cleared from JNPT by State Excise Authorities, despite previous court orders stating the goods did not fall under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The petitioners' goods, namely Ethanol, were seized on 11 December 2023, leading to reputational damage and market standing concerns.

Involvement of Intervenors:
Intervenors, representing MSB Chemical Limited and Laboratory Solutions India, supported the seizure, claiming the petitioners' imports were affecting their business interests. The sudden appearance of intervenors and their contentions raised suspicions of ulterior motives behind the seizure, potentially influenced by the petitioners' competitors.

Judicial Findings and Directions:
The Court found the seizure to be illegal and unauthorized, disregarding previous court orders permitting the goods' clearance. It criticized the Excise Officials for acting in bad faith, potentially at the behest of private interests. The Court directed the release of the seized goods and ordered an inquiry by the Additional Chief Secretary into the officials' conduct and the involvement of private parties. The inquiry aims to restore trust in the rule of law and ensure accountability for the officials' actions. The Court emphasized the need for officials to act lawfully and responsibly, highlighting the serious consequences of abusing their powers.

Conclusion:
The judgment concludes by disposing of the petition, pending compliance with the release of the goods and scheduling further proceedings for January 2024. The Court's decision to investigate the officials' conduct and potential disciplinary actions underscores the importance of upholding the rule of law and protecting citizens' rights against abuse of power.

---