MANHARAN SATNAMI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of the CrPC is directed against the order dated 11.11.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirdham, in Criminal Revision No.21/2019, affirming the order of the Excise Commissioner in Appeal by which the Excise Commissioner has affirmed the order of learned Collector/District Magistrate confiscating the petitioner's vehicle found involved in excise offence in exercise of power conferred under Section 47-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter called as 'the Act of 1915').

(2.) Mr.Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the Collector/District Magistrate while confiscating the offending vehicle did not follow the mandatory provisions contained in Section 47-A(3) of the Act of 1915, particularly Section 47-A(3)(c) which renders the entire confiscation illegal and bad in law as the petitioner was neither afforded an opportunity of material collected in support of proposed confiscation and even he was not given an opportunity of making a representation against proposed confiscation and thereby suffered serious prejudice and therefore, the impugned order passed by the Collector as affirmed by the Excise Commissioner and the Additional Sessions Judge deserves to be set-aside.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr.Ravi Bhagat, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the respondent/State, would support the impugned order and submit that order of confiscation has rightly been passed by the learned Collector, which has been affirmed by the appellate and revisional authorities is in accordance with law and as such, the petition deserves to be dismissed.