Patna High Court Upholds Special Court’s Decision: No Jurisdiction to Release Seized Vehicles under Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Case title: Kalam Ansari VS The State of Bihar
Case no.: CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11188 of 2024
Dated on: 22nd May 2024
Quorum: Hon’ble. MR JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
FACTS OF THE CASE
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing and setting aside the order dated 28.11.2023 passed by Ld. Special Judge (Excise), Court No.-II, Muzaffarpur in Excise P.S. Case No. 1777 of 2023 dated 11.09.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 48 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, whereby Ld. Special Court has rejected the application filed on behalf of the Petitioner to release the seized Truck bearing Registration No. JH-10CR-7110, Chassis No. MC2ERHRC0PDB05988, Engine No. E446CDP063534 in favour of the Petitioner holding that the jurisdiction of the Special Court is barred under Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act to release the vehicle seized under the Act. As per the materials on record, the vehicle in question was seized by the Police with 2847liter liquor and subsequently, Excise P.S. Case No. 1777 of 2023 dated 11.09.2023 was lodged against the owner, who is the Petitioner herein, and other two Accused persons for offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(2) and 48 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
ISSUES
- Whether the Special Court has the jurisdiction to order the release of the vehicle seized under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the vehicle seized under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 can be released by any court or if there are specific provisions under the Act and the Rules that provide a mechanism for the release of such vehicles.
- Whether the rejection of the petitioner’s application by the Special Court was in compliance with the statutory provisions under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021.
- Whether the petitioner has any alternate remedies available under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, particularly concerning Rule 12A and Section 57B.
- Whether the petitioner can invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in light of the bar on jurisdiction of the Special Court under Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether there is any illegality, impropriety, or miscarriage of justice in the impugned order passed by the Special Judge (Excise) in rejecting the petitioner’s application for the release of the seized vehicle.
LEGAL PROVISIONS
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.): This section grants inherent powers to the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.
The Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016:
Section 30(a): Deals with the penalties for manufacturing, transporting, possessing, or selling intoxicants without a license.
Section 32(2): Pertains to penalties related to the illegal possession of intoxicants.
Section 48: Addresses the offenses related to the abetment of the violations mentioned in the Act.
Section 56 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016: This section deals with the confiscation of vehicles, vessels, or any other conveyances used for transporting intoxicants illegally.
Section 57B of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (inserted in 2022): Allows for the release of a vehicle seized under the Act by the Collector upon payment of a penalty as notified by the State Government.
Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016: Explicitly bars any court from having jurisdiction to pass orders for the release of vehicles seized under this Act, indicating that only specified authorities (such as the Collector) can handle such matters.
Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 (as amended in 2022): Provides a mechanism for the release of seized vehicles upon payment of a stipulated penalty, detailing the procedural aspects to be followed for such release.
CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the petitioner possesses all valid documents relating to the vehicle showing that he is owner of the vehicle. He further submits that he has also valid documents regarding the liquor which was loaded in the Truck. He also claims that Ld. Special Court has jurisdiction to release the vehicle under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS
Learned. APP for the State defends the impugned order submitting that under Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, jurisdiction of the Special Court is barred in regard to release of any vehicles seized under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and hence, there is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order. He further submits that the seized vehicle in question is liable to be confiscated under Section 56 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. However, under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, as stands after amendment in 2022, read with Section 57B of the Act, 2016, the Petitioner is at liberty to get the vehicle released after payment of penalty as stipulated in the Rules.
COURT’S ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT
After perusal of the aforesaid statutory provisions, it clearly transpires that jurisdiction of any Court is barred to pass any order in regard to seized vehicle or other items as mentioned in the Section 60 of the Act. It also clearly transpires that the seized material under the Act is liable to be confiscated as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. However, as per the Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, the Petitioner has liberty to move an application for releasing the vehicle on payment of penalty as decided by Excise Officials under the Rules. It is also pertinent to note that despite provisions for bar of jurisdiction of any Court in any statute, writ jurisdiction of High Court is not ousted. Here, it would be relevant to refer to Suresh Sah Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., 2020(1) BLJ 706, wherein Division Bench of this Court had occasion to consider the jurisdiction of Special Excise Court and High Court in view of Section 60 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Section 57B as inserted in 2022, by way of amendment, provides that any vehicle used for committing any offence punishable under the Prohibition and Excise Act and having been seized by any police officer or Excise Officer may be released by the Collector upon payment of such penalty as may be notified by the State Government. Here, it was clearly held that in the light of Section 60 of said Act, jurisdiction of Special Excise Court is barred, but such bar does not operate in the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The relevant paragraph of the Suresh Sah case (supra) reads as In Sunaina @ Suneina Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., (2024 SCC online Pat 851, AIR ONLINE 2024 PAT 73, 2024 (3) BLJ 163), Division Bench of this Court exercising writ jurisdiction, has further held that if the requisites for seizure or confiscation of vehicle are not fulfilled, the seizure or confiscation of any vehicle under the Excise Act, 2016 would be arbitrary and violative of Article 300A of the Constitution and the owner of the vehicle would be entitled not only to the release of the vehicle but even compensation on account of such seizure or confiscation. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it clearly emerges that Special Excise Court has no jurisdiction to pass any order in regard to the vehicle seized under the provisions of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Hence, Ld. Special Excise Court has rightly rejected the application of the Petitioner. There is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order, nor is any miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in limine upholding the impugned order. However, the Petitioner, if so advised, is at liberty to invoke writ jurisdiction of this Court, if he is of the view that his vehicle was not liable to be seized under the Excise Act. But if the Petitioner believes that he has violated the statutory provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 rendering his vehicle liable to be seized/confiscated, he may move appropriate application before the Executive Officials for releasing the vehicle on payment of penalty under the Act and the Rules made thereunder. Hence petition stands dismissed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement Reviewed by – HARIRAGHAVA JP
Click here to read the judgement
