https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269731 Confiscation of a vehicle under the Kerala Abkari Act depends on more than proof of its use in an offence: the authority must be satisfied that the use occurred with the owner's knowledge or connivance, or without reasonable precautions by the owner. Section 67C(2) places a positive burden on the owner to rebut that inference, and a bare denial is insufficient. On the stated facts, the owner's lack of complicity was treated as probable, supported by the small quantity involved, the driver's acquittal, and other surrounding circumstances, so the confiscation order was unsustainable and release of the security was directed. en-us Fri, 20 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Dec 2015 22:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269731 Confiscation of a vehicle under the Kerala Abkari Act depends on more than proof of its use in an offence: the authority must be satisfied that the use occurred with the owner's knowledge or connivance, or without reasonable precautions by the owner. Section 67C(2) places a positive burden on the owner to rebut that inference, and a bare denial is insufficient. On the stated facts, the owner's lack of complicity was treated as probable, supported by the small quantity involved, the driver's acquittal, and other surrounding circumstances, so the confiscation order was unsustainable and release of the security was directed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269731