TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 865
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellant by the District Magistrate, who is also the Collector of the District to show cause as to why the seized truck be not confiscated. The show cause notice in respect of the Santro Car meant for Nisar Ahmed son of Nazir was issued as to why the car be not confiscated. 5) On an application filed by Nisar Ahmed, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar on March 15, 2016 passed an order of release of Santro Car. 6) The appellant filed objections before the District Magistrate on September 23, 2016 in response to the show cause notice served on him wherein the appellant sought release of the Vehicle as it is sole means of his livelihood and that he will suffer financial loss. In pursuance of such show cause notice, the District Magistrate passed an order of confiscation and auction of both vehicles, owned by Nisar Ahmed and the Appellant, and the sale proceeds be deposited in Government treasury. However, the appellant was given an option in terms of Section 72 of the Act to pay Rs. 4,50,000/- as market value of the truck. Nisar was given an option to pay Rs. 1,20,000/- to seek release of the car. 7) The appellant filed an appeal before the learned District Judge, a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvestigate into the offences punishable under the Act. Section 50 of the Act confers power of arrest, seizure and detention on the specified Excise and Police Officers whereas Chapter X deals with offences and penalties which can be imposed for the violation of the provisions of the Act. Section 72 of the Act deals with the things which are liable for confiscation. The relevant provisions read as under: - "49. Powers of certain officers to investigate into offences punishable under this Act. - (1) A police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector and an officer of the Excise Department not below such rank as the State Government may prescribe, may investigate into any offence punishable under this Act committed within the limits of the area in which such officer exercises jurisdiction. (2) Any such officer may exercise the same powers in respect of such investigation as an officer in charge of a police station may exercise in a cognizable case under the provisions of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and if specially empowered in that behalf by the State Government, such officer may, without reference to a Magistrate, and for reasons to be recorded by hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the other contents (if any) of such receptacle or package; (e) every animal, cart, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying such receptacle or package shall be liable to confiscation. (2) Where anything or animal is seized under any provision of this Act and the Collector is satisfied for reasons to be recorded that an offence has been committed due to which such thing or animal has become liable to confiscation under sub-section (1), he may order confiscation of such thing or animal "whether or not a prosecution for such offence has been instituted": Provided that in the case of anything (except an intoxicant) or animal referred to in sub-section (1), the owner thereof shall be given an option to pay in lieu of its confiscation such fine as the Collector thinks adequate not exceeding its market value on the date of its seizure. (3) Where the Collector on receiving report of seizure or on inspection of the seized things, including any animal, cart, vessel or other conveyance, is of the opinion that "any such things or animal is subject to speedy wear and tear or natural decay or it is otherwise expedient in the public interest so to do", he may order such things (ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....may be, after issuing notice on his own motion within one month from the order under the sub-section refusing confiscation to the owner of the thing or animal seized or to the person from whose possession it was seized to show cause why the order should not be reviewed, and after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the Collector is satisfied that the order suffers from the mistake apparent on the face of the record including any mistake of law, he may pass such order on review as he thinks fit. (7) Any person aggrieved by an order of the confiscation under subsection (2) or sub-section (6) may, within one month from the date of the communication to him of such order, appeal to such judicial authority as the State Government may appoint in this behalf and the judicial authority shall, after giving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard, pass such order as it may think fit, confirming, modifying or annulling the order appealed against. (8) Where a prosecution is instituted for the offence in relation to which such confiscation was ordered the thing or animal "shall subject to the provisions of subsection (4) be disposed of in accordance with the order of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s held that such confiscation is independent of result of prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court held as under: "146. In the case at hand, the entire proceeding is meant to arrive at the conclusion whether on the basis of the application preferred by the Public Prosecutor and the material brought on record, the whole or any other money or some of the property in question has been acquired illegally and further any money or property or both have been acquired by the means of the offence. After arriving at the said conclusion, the order of confiscation is passed. The order of confiscation is subject to appeal under Section 17 of the Orissa Act. That apart, it is provided under Section 19 where an order of confiscation made under Section 15 is modified or annulled by the High Court in appeal or where the person affected is acquitted by the Special Court, the money or property or both shall be returned to the person affected. Thus, it is basically a confiscation which is interim in nature. Therefore, it is not a punishment as envisaged in law and hence, it is difficult to accept the submission that it is a pre-trial punishment and, accordingly, we repel ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f imprisonment which was imposed upon the appellant was certainly not greater than that permitted by Section 420. The sentence of fine also was not greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law which had been in force at the time of the commission of the offence, as a fine unlimited in extent could be imposed under the section.'" (K. Satwant Singh case [K. Satwant Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 266 : 1960 Cri LJ 410] , AIR p. 275, para 28)" 15) Recently, this Court in Uday Singh referred to earlier judgments of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh and Others v. Kallo Bai (2017) 14 SCC 502 and Divisional Forest Officer and Another v. G. V. Sudhakar Rao and Others (1985) 4 SCC 573 to approve the argument that criminal proceedings are distinct from confiscation proceedings. The Court held as under: "22. In 2017, a similar view has been taken by another two judge Bench of this Court in Kallo Bai (supra) while construing the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Van Upaj (Vyapar Viniyam) Adhiniyam, 1969. By virtue of the amendments made to the Adhiniyam, Sections 15-A to 15-D were introduced to provide for confiscation proceedings in line with the provisions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n order of confiscation is passed by him. 18) The distribution of sale proceeds after the thing or animal is sold, is contemplated by sub-section (4) of Section 72 of the Act. It deals with a situation when no order of confiscation is ultimately passed or maintained by the Collector or an order passed on appeal under sub-section (7) so requires. Similar power is conferred to distribute the sale proceeds in terms of the order of the Court in case of a prosecution instituted for the offence in respect of thing or animal seized. Thus, sub-section (4) deals with the disposal of sale proceeds of the seized thing or Animal in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 72 of the Act. In other words, the sale conducted by auction or otherwise in terms of sub-section (3) is complete but the distribution of proceeds of sale alone is to be dealt with in the manner prescribed in sub-section (4) of Section 72 of the Act including an order of the Court dealing with prosecution instituted for the offence. 19) Sub-section (5) of Section 72 of the Act deals with the procedure and the limitations on the power of the Collector to sell the seized thing including any animal, cart, vessel or other conveyan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stituted for the offence, in terms of sub-section (8) of Section 72 of the Act, is subject to provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 72 of the Act. Thus, the provision again deals with distribution of the sale proceeds after confiscation on conclusion of prosecution. 23) The power of release of the property produced before any criminal court whether interim or final in terms of Sections 451, 452 or 457 of the Code will not be available to court except the order in respect of distribution of sale proceeds. Therefore, the power under Sections 451, 452 or 457 of the Code available to criminal court or Magistrate is inconsistent with the provisions contained in the Act regarding disposal of the property not only in respect of pending trial but also after the conclusion of the trial. 24) The argument raised that the judgment in Narender is not applicable to the present case cannot be accepted as the criminal court before whom the prosecution is lodged, will not have jurisdiction to release anything or animal whether interim or final as the Act in question has provisions contrary to the provisions contained in the Code. This Court in Narender relied upon the judgment in State of Ka....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... an offence which can be investigated by an Excise Officer as well as by a Police Officer. But the exclusive power of confiscation is vested with the Collector in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 72 of the Act. The sale proceeds of seized things or Animal which are subject to speedy wear and tear or natural decay, if sold, are required to be paid to the person found entitled thereto in terms of sub-sections (4) and (8) of Section 72 of the Act. 27) Sub-section (9) of Section 72 of the Act clarifies that no order of confiscation made by the Collector shall prevent the infliction of any punishment to which the person affected thereby may be liable under this Act. Thus, the punishment consequent to the prosecution is distinct from the order of confiscation passed by the Collector. 28) In Madhukar Rao's case, the provisions of the Code and that of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 were examined. The Court found that the use of a vehicle in the commission of an offence under the Act, without anything else would bar its interim release appears to be quite unreasonable. The Court held that the provisions of Section 50 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the amendments ma....