MISHRILAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khetiya, District Barwani in M.J.C. No.08/2004 in which the present applicant was given a notice to produce the vehicle bearing registration No.CPU5401 which was confiscated vide judgment dated 26.06.2004 in Criminal Case No.451/1999 in which the Judicial Magistrate in para 21 of the judgment found that the seized 600 cartons of liquor and the vehicle bearing registration No.CPU5401 were liable to be confiscated and, therefore, the supurdaginama on which the liquor in the vehicle was given were cancelled and it was ordered that the vehicle and the liquor were confiscated and the supurdar were directed to produce the property within a month.

(2.) The present applicant was driver of the vehicle. As per the prosecution story on 07.05.1995, Police Station Pansemal, District Barwani, received a source information that the truck bearing registration No.CPU5401 was carrying some contraband liquor. The vehicle was intercepted and searched in which liquor was found. Charge sheet was filed. After trial, the aforesaid order of confiscation was passed.

(3.) When the present applicant, who was also the accused in that case and faced the trial, received notice for producing the vehicle before the Magistrate. He submitted before the Court that he was only a driver. After getting the vehicle on supurdaginama, he handed over the vehicle to the owner. He further said that before confiscating the vehicle, the Magistrate should have given a show cause notice to the owner and the supurdar to show that the vehicle was being used without any knowledge of the owner and he should have also given a chance to adduce necessary evidence in this regard and then only the vehicle should have been confiscated. This proceeding was not done and, therefore, according to the present applicant the order of confiscation is bad in law.