PRABIRA SIKDAR Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner Prabira Sikdar has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 18.06.2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur in Criminal Revision No.12 of 2018, whereby the learned revisional Court dismissed the revision petition and thereby confirmed the order dated 23.05.2018 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Jagatsinghpur in Criminal Misc. Case No.48 of 2018 which arises out of 2(a)C.C. Case No.65 of 2018.

(2.) The facts of the case is that the petitioner who is an accused in 2(a)C.C. Case No.65 of 2018 along with the coaccused were transporting cartoons containing liquor in an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.OD-05-P-3812 on 18.03.2018 and they were intercepted by the complainant who was the S.I. of Excise, District Mobile Squard, Jagatsinghpur and from the auto rickshaw, fifteen nos. of cartoons containing liquor bottles in sealed condition were found. The petitioner was detained but the co-accused managed to flee away from the spot. Since the petitioner has failed to produce any authority for transporting the cartoons carrying liquor bottles, those were seized along with the auto rickshaw. The petitioner after being released on bail filed a petition under section 457 of Cr.P.C. before the learned S.D.J.M., Jagatsinghpur to release the auto rickshaw and vide order dated 23.05.2018, the learned Magistrate held that since the case has been instituted under section 52(a) of the Odisha Excise Act for unlawful possession and transportation of IMFL beer and the petitioner is the owner of the auto rickshaw in question which is involved in the alleged offence, he rejected the petition under section 457 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid order approached the revisional Court in Criminal Revision No.12 of 2018 and the learned Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur exercising his revisional power held that since Odisha Excise Act prescribes for confiscation proceeding, the provision under section 457 of Cr.P.C. is not applicable and accordingly, rejected the revision petition.

(3.) Miss D.R. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that even though the auto rickshaw was seized with the cartoons of beer bottles on 18.03.2018 but till today no confiscation proceeding has been initiated as enumerated under the Odisha Excise Act and therefore, the observation of the learned revisional Court that the power under section 457 of Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked is not proper. It is further contended that a person cannot be left remediless and the entire thing cannot be left in the mercy of the authority to initiate the confiscation proceeding and the vehicle being left under the open air being exposed to sun and rain, its condition is deteriorating day by day and therefore, it is a proper case where the power under section 457 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised and since there is no dispute that the petitioner is the registered owner of the seized auto rickshaw in question, it should be released in favour of the petitioner with suitable terms and conditions. She placed reliance in the cases of Narayan Tripathy -Vrs.- State of Orissa, 2012 52 OCR 634, Smt. Jasoda Das -Vrs.- State of Orissa, 2003 26 OCR 729, Jugal Kishore Nayak -Vrs.- The Authorised Officer -cum- Divisional Forest Officer, 2003 2 OrissaLR 530 and Rajkishore Das @ Baidhar -Vrs.- State of Orissa,2008 Supp CLT(Cri) 1260.