SHARAD NAVNATH GANGE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is no proper assistance in the present matter on behalf of the State counsel despite our repeated requests for apprising this Court to the extent that who is the officer/employee who valued the seized truck to the tune of Rs.2.00 lakhs when it is worth about 21 lakhs as is evident from the insurance policy issued by Reliance General Insurance. Insurance policy was in vogue during the period from 19/1/2022 to midnight 18/1/2023 whereas the vehicle was seized on 26/12/2022 for the offences under the Excise Act. Thereafter, concerned authority has proceeded to initiate and conclude the confiscation proceedings. Confiscation proceedings was completed and thereafter proceeded to auction the subject matter of vehicle at throwaway price of Rs.2.00 lakhs. What is the mode of valuation of the vehicle and by a competent authority is not forthcoming. That apart owner of the vehicle has not been issued personal notice relating to confiscation proceedings and so also proposed for auction and date of auction and other details. On the other hand, the concerned official proceeded to publish the notice of auction only in the local newspaper which was circulated in the State of Bihar whereas the petitioner owner of the vehicle is resident of Mumbai and so also the vehicle was registered at Thane, Mumbai. In this regard, primary duty of the competent authority who has undertaken the confiscation proceedings and further auction of the subject matter of the vehicle to ascertain from the concerned Regional Transport Office relating to details of the owner of the vehicle. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent State, on instruction, submitted that the Officials had communicated with the Regional Transport Office of the Vaishali District and they did not secure the details of the owner including residential address or office address which was registered in the concerned RTO.

(2.) Every step of the officials reveals lapses on the part of the Excise Officials as well as Revenue Officials in the present matter. Therefore, Principal Secretary, Department of Registration and Excise, Bihar, Patna is hereby directed to register criminal case against such of those officials who are involved in the present case insofar as determining the valuation of auction of the subject matter of vehicle at throwaway price of Rs.2.00 lakhs when it is worth about Rs.21.00 lakhs as is evident from the Reliance General Insurance policy issued on 18/1/2022 for the period from 19/1/2022 to midnight of 18/1/2023 read with seizure of vehicle on 26/12/2022. Simultaneously, departmental inquiry shall be initiated against such of those erring officials and proceed to frame charges for alleged loss caused to the State exchequer to the tune of Rs.21.00 lakhs minus 2 lakhs (auction realization as on account of auction of the vehicle). In this regard, report shall be submitted on the next date of hearing.

(3.) The State Government officials must take note of their power coupled with duty. In this regard, principle of power coupled with duty was succinctly stated by Earl Cairns, L.C. in the House of Lords in Julius Versus Lord Bishop of Oxford [(1880) 5 AC 214] (AC at pp. 222-23) quoted with the approval therewith by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Police Versus Gordhandas Bhanji [1952 SCR 135] (SCR at p. 147) :