(1.) The Petitioner is the owner of a Mahindra Thar vehicle bearing Regn. No.KL-45-L-84. He filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P4 Order by which his vehicle was confiscated under Sec. 67B of the Abkari Act and Ext.P5 Appellate Order under Sec. 67E of the Abkari Act confirming Ext.P4 Order and to release the vehicle on the ground that Crime No.1707/2014 of the Kodakara Police Station in connection to which the vehicle was confiscated ended in acquittal of the accused as per Ext.P6 Order of the Additional Assistant Sessions Court , Irinjalakkuda in S.C.No.581/2015.
(2.) The Second Respondent filed the Counter Affidavit dtd. 24/6/2024 opposing the prayers in the Writ Petition contending ,inter alia, that the vehicle of the petitioner was found loaded with 150 Litres of toddy in 5 cans during the search conducted by the Sub Inspector of Police Kodakara on 15/10/2014 in the house of one Sri.Laiju in which 5 litres of toddy in a drum and 60 litres of toddy in 2 cans and other utensils were also found; that the said Laiju had valid Inter Division Toddy Transport Permit to transport toddy upto 30/9/2014; that the vehicle of the petitioner was the permitted vehicle; that the petitioner failed to prove that the involvement of the vehicle was without his knowledge and that he had taken reasonable and necessary precaution against the misuse of the vehicle; that admittedly the petitioner permitted to use the vehicle for transportation of toddy in the vehicle without valid permit; that the vehicle used for transporting toddy without valid Permit is liable for confiscation; that the Authorised Officer is entitled to proceed with the confiscation proceedings dehors the other provisions of the Act, irrespective whether the accused is prosecuted or not for the offence involved and irrespective of the outcome of such prosecution; and that the confiscation order is perfectly legal and valid.
(3.) I heard Sri.Britto.N.L for the petitioner and Learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.Bimal.K.Nath for the respondents.