STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. YOGENDRASINH RANJITSINH RAJPUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application, the applicant-State seeks to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 and supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India so also inherent powers under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for quashing of the order dtd. 3/10/2017 passed by learned 2nd Ad-hoc Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Valsad in Criminal Revision Application No.252 of 2017 and to confirm the order dtd. 10/8/2017 passed in relation to offence registered at Valsad City Police Station, Valsad being III-C.R. No.16 of 2017 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Valsad.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present application may be summarized as under;

(3.) Learned APP Mr. L.B. Dabhi appearing for the applicant- State of Gujarat submits that a complaint came to be registered by a public servant serving in the police department as a head constable being C.R. No.III-16 of 2017 for the offence punishable under Ss. 65(e) and 116(B) of the Prohibition Act alleging illegal transportation of the prohibited liquor by the accused persons. It is alleged in the FIR that upon suspicion being created in the mind of the police with regard to illegal trafficking of prohibited liquor, they intercepted one Alto Car from which number of bottles and tins of whiskey and beer were found and, therefore, the said car was then seized by the police. Learned APP Mr. Dabhi further submits that, therefore, the owner of the said vehicle filed an application under Sec. 451 of Cr.P.c before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Valsad for interim release of the said vehicle by producing all the relevant materials regarding the ownership of the vehicle. After hearing both the parties and appreciating all the materials available on record, the learned Magistrate rejected the said application vide order dtd. 10/8/2017 by observing that there is a specific bar under Sec. 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act which provides that any muddamal article seized in connection with the prohibition offence, cannot be released on any kind of bond or surety till the final judgment of the court when the quantity of the seized liquor exceeds 10 liter. Admittedly, the prohibited liquor found from the vehicle in question was more than 10 liter and, therefore, the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the application as there are specific restrictions imposed by the statute itself.