SHAJU Vs. ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the registered owner of a Hero Honda motor cycle bearing Regn. No. KL-7 AP 9646, which was seized from him following his involvement in CR NO.5/05 registered under the Abkari Act on the allegation that the vehicle was used for the transportation of illicit arrack.

(2.) Subsequently, the petitioner was informed by the 1st respondent, by Ext.P2 letter dated 16/10/2007, that if he did not deposit an amount of Rs.22,500/- within 7 days, the vehicle will be sold and that the value will be deposited with the Government. Petitioner submits that in the meantime by Ext.P3, the judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc II) Ernakulam in SC NO.143/07, the petitioner and the other accused were acquitted. It is contended that on his acquittal by Ext. P3, the confiscation of the vehicle as confirmed by Ext. P1 has been rendered illegal. Petitioner contends that as his innocence stands upheld by Ext.P3 judgment of the Sessions Court, Exts. P1 and P2 are liable to be quashed and the motor cycle is liable to be released to him.

(3.) The respondents, on the other hand contended that the acquittal of the petitioner was not an honourable one, but was only one giving benefit of doubt. It is contended that in any event, prosecution for the offence under the Abkari Act for which he was charge sheeted in S.C. No. 143/07 and the proceedings for confiscation of the vehicle that was involved in the offence, are independent and separate. According to them, the outcome of the Sessions Case has no bearing on the confiscation proceedings and therefore acquittal of the petitioner will not render the order of confiscation illegal.