NEERAJ SHAH Vs. THE SESSIONS JUDGE & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 4.11.2004 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Almora, rendered in criminal appeal No. 3/2003, Neeraj Shah Vs. State. While disposing of the said appeal, learned Sessions Judge affirmed the order passed by learned District Magistrate, Almora dated 26.5.2003, thereby confiscating the Maruti Car No. UP.02/0055 under Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910. In lieu of confiscation, the owner Neeraj Shah was given liberty to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/ -. Aggrieved by the said order, Neeraj Shah preferred an appeal, which too was dismissed by learned Sessions Judge on merits. Feeling further disgruntled, he has come up in this revision. It is pertinent to mention that none has turned up on behalf of the revisionist even in the third revised call, however on the previous date, the adjournment was sought by revisionist's counsel Sri Deep Chand Joshi. So, this Court has given hearing to learned brief holder for the State and has gone through the grounds of revision.

(2.) IT is disclosed from the entire facts, on record, that on 27.8.2002, the said Maruti Car was searched by the police, wherein a cane of 20 litres, filled with contraband liquor, was found. This liquor was being transported illegally in the hills. The revisionist, being the owner of the vehicle, was given a notice on 13.9.2002, as required u/s 72(5)(a) of the U.P. Excise Act, to show cause as to why his Maruti car be not confiscated, as the same was found carrying contraband liquor. Revisionist also filed his objections before the District Magistrate on 8.10.2002, but his objections were found unworthy, so, the learned District Magistrate passed the above order. Having gone through the grounds of revision, it appears that the same have been drafted in a very routine manner. There is no cogent and convincing ground to set aside the orders passed by the courts below. Even there appears to be no incongruity or infirmity in the judgment of learned District Magistrate as well as that of learned Sessions Judge. So, this revision is devoid of any merit and liable to be dismissed. Revision is, accordingly, dismissed.