TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 561
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shable under Section 34(2) of the Act of 1915 as the said vehicle was found involved in transporting 126 liters of country made liquor. (3) The Prosecuting Agency, after seizure of the vehicle, sent intimation to the Collector, Mahasamund; and the Collector, Mahasamund registered Revenue Case No. 206-B/121 year 2013-14 under Section 47-A of the Act, 1915; and Collector in exercise of power conferred under clause (a) of sub-Section (3) of Section 47-A of the Act of 1915 sent an intimation about the initiation of the proceedings for confiscation of the seized vehicle to the trial Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offences on 28th August, 2014. (4) The petitioner made an application under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (henceforth 'the Code') stating inter alia that he, being the registered owner of the vehicle, is entitled for custody of the vehicle in question as it is lying unused in the Police Station and it is likely to be damaged if the custody is not granted to the petitioner herein, which is opposed by the prosecution on the ground that petitioner is not entitled for custody in view of express bar contained in Section 47-D of the Act of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submit that the Collector after having initiated the confiscation proceeding of the seized vehicle, has already sent an intimation to the trial Magistrate as provided in clause (a) of sub-Section 3 of Section 47-A of the Act 1915; and in view of specific bar under Section 47-D of the Act, which clearly bars the jurisdiction of the Court having jurisdiction to try the offences covered by sub-Section (1) of Section 34 of the Act to make order about the custody of the seized vehicle after receiving intimation from the Collector under Clause (a) of sub-Section (3) of Section 47-A of the Act of 1915 about the intimation of the initiation of the proceeding for confiscation of seized vehicle, the order passed by the trial Court rejecting the application for custody of the vehicle as affirmed by the revisional Court is based on the material available on record, which does not call for any interference by this Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code. (11) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given thoughtful consideration to the submission so raised and also perused the material available on record with utmost circumspection. (12) After he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ings for confiscation of the seized property, then the Court shall not make any order about the disposal/custody of the seized property including conveyance, materials, intoxicant etc. (16) In Divisional Forest Officer Vs. G.V. Sudhaker Rao & others AIR 1986 SC 328, their Lordships of Supreme Court has observed that the general provisions of Sections 452 and 457 of the Code must necessarily yield where a statute makes a special provision with regard to forfeiture of the property and its disposal. Relevant paragraph of the report states as under:- "The change in the law was brought about with a view to prevent the growing menace of ruthless exploitation of Govt. Forest by illicit felling of teak and other valuable forest produce by unscrupulous traders, particularly from Reserved Forests by providing for a machinery for confiscation of illegally felled trees or forest produce by forest authorities.... There was no provision in the Act enabling the Forest Officers to confiscate such timber or forest produce and implements etc. used for committing forest offences even in a case where he was satisfied that a forest offence had been committed. In view of this, the Forest Deptt. Wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 452 of the Code or that of Section 457 authorising a Magistrate to make an order for disposal of property, if seized by an officer and not produced before a criminal court during an inquiry or trial, however, has to yield where a statutes makes a special provision with regard to its confiscation and disposal. We have referred to the scheme of the Act and from that it is evident that the vehicle seized has to be produced before the Deputy Commissioner, who in turn has been conferred with the power of its confiscation or release to its rightful owner. The requirement of production of seized property before the Deputy Commission under Section 59 (1) of the Act is, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, and, so also is the power of confiscation. Not only this, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, no court, in terms of Section 61 of the Act, has jurisdiction to make any order with regard to the property used in commission of any offence under the Act. In the present case, the Legislature has used a non-obstante clause is a legislative device to give effect to the enacting part of section in case of conflict over ....