RAJ Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 13/9/2023 passed by the Collector, District Barwani whereby petitioner's vehicle white colour Maruti Suzuki Echo Car bearing registration No.MP-09-WM-4494 has been confiscated. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was found carrying 108.64 bulk liter of unauthorized liquor without a valid license.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that admittedly, a case under Sec. 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act has been registered against the petitioner vide Crime No.132/2023 at Police Station Palsud, District Barwani. The case is still pending in the Criminal Court, however, the confiscation proceedings have been initiated and have also been concluded and by the impugned order dtd. 13/9/2023 the Collector, District Barwani has ordered the vehicle to be confiscated. It is also submitted that it is a trite law that while the criminal case under the M.P. Excise Act is pending in the criminal Court, the confiscation proceeding cannot be initiated and to support his submissions counsel has relied upon an order passed by this Court in W.P. No.12666 of 2023 (Aman Vs. The State of M.P. and Ors) dtd. 14/6/2023 . Thus, it is submitted that the impugned order be set aside.

(3.) Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer, however, it is not denied that this Court on various occasions has quashed the order of confiscation holding that the confiscation proceedings cannot be initiated unless criminal case comes to an end.