TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Interim release of seized vehicle: order rejecting release set aside and matter remanded for fresh hearing.</h1> Application for interim release of a seized vehicle challenged the owners lack of knowledge of the alleged offence; statutory procedure under the Orissa ... Rejection of application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. seeking the interim release of vehicle, in favour of the petitioner, who happens to be the owner of the vehicle - It is claimed by the petitioner that he being the owner of the vehicle had no idea of the alleged crime - HELD THAT:- A plain reading of Section 71 of the Orissa Excise Act reveals that the Subsection (2) provide that the Officer seizing any property under Section 71 of the Orissa Excise Act shall except where the offender agrees in writing to get the offence compounded under Section 75 produce the property seized before the Collector, or an authorized officer, not below the rank of a Superintendent of Excise, authorized by the State Government in this behalf by notification (hereinafter referred to as the 'authorised officer'. The law is very well settled that whenever valuable property like vehicle is seized then it should be produced before the officer, so authorized in this case. Collector or Authorized Officer duly notified, should be produced within a reasonable time and confiscation proceeding should be started. Since right to property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India is a legal right, though it is not a fundamental right, it is incumbent on the part of the Government Functionary to see that the confiscation proceeding is taken up as early as possible, especially, when there is a protection given to the innocent owner of the vehicle etc. In a case involving provision of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, a Bench of this Court having taking into consideration various judgments of this Court, in the case of Kishore Kumar Choudhury Vrs. State of Orissa, [2017 (3) TMI 1974 - ORISSA HIGH COURT], has allowed interim release of vehicle seized. So, in that view of the matter, the CRLMC is allowed in part. The order dated 29.03.2018 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Boudh rejecting the application is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the lower Court for fresh hearing. The CRLMC is disposed of by way of remand. Issues: Whether a criminal court may entertain an application for interim release of a seized vehicle under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. when confiscation proceedings under Sections 71 and 72 of the Orissa Excise Act, 2008 are pending, in circumstances where the vehicle owner is not an accused and it is not shown that the vehicle was produced before the Collector or authorised officer.Analysis: The Orissa Excise Act, 2008 provides for seizure and confiscation of property (Section 71) and contains a bar on release during pending confiscation proceedings (Section 72). Sub-section (2) of Section 71 requires production of seized property before the Collector or an authorised officer and sub-section (5) permits avoidance of confiscation if the owner proves lack of knowledge and precautions taken. The criminal court's power under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. to release property may be exercised where confiscation proceedings have not been initiated or the seized property has not been produced before the authorised officer within a reasonable time. The learned lower court declined relief solely on the basis of the statutory bar without verifying whether production before the Collector or initiation of confiscation proceedings had in fact occurred.Conclusion: The petition is allowed in part. The order rejecting the application is set aside and the matter is remitted to the trial court to ascertain whether the vehicle was produced before the Collector or authorised officer and whether confiscation proceedings have been initiated. If the vehicle is not produced and confiscation proceedings are not commenced or completed within the specified time limits, the criminal court shall have jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C. where the owner is not an accused.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
