RAMADHAR ROY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(2.) The petitioner's four wheeler vehicle Datsun Go is alleged to have been involved in Danapur P.S. Case No. 178 of 2020 dtd. 4/3/2020 for the offences under Excise Act. In this regard, the Superintendent of Police, Patna forwarded report on 12/6/2020 to the concerned District Magistrate. The petitioner had appeared before the District Magistrate on 8/9/2020. Thereafter, petitioner could not file his reply or has a say in the matter of confiscation till 22/2/2021 resulted in deciding the confiscation proceedings on 22/2/2021. Petitioner had suffered confiscation order and he had preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority on 23/9/2021 and suffered an order on 4/10/2021. Similarly, he has suffered order in the revision on 23/3/2022, hence, the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that confiscating authority has delayed the process which means there is a violation of statutory provision under Sec. 58 of Bihar Prohibition And Excise Act 2016 (for short 'Act 2016'). It is further submitted that auction proceedings was not made known to the petitioner and subject matter of motor vehicle was notified in the Newspaper called Hindustan (Hindi) on 27/8/2021 and motor vehicle was auctioned on 8/9/2021. Thereafter, on 23/9/2021 petitioner had preferred an appeal. It was pointed out that subject matter of motor vehicle cannot be auctioned unless and until appeal is decided by the Appellate Authority in the light of Rule 14 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 (for short 'Rules, 2021'). It is also submitted that at throw away price, subject matter of motor vehicle has been auctioned and petitioner intends to pay the auction price for return of subject matter of motor vehicle.