Ravi Singh v. The State Of Bihar Through The Home Secretary The Government Of Bihar, Patna And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1020 of 2017 Arising out of P. S. Case No. - null Year - null Thana - null District - ARRARIA =========================================================== Ravi Singh, Son of Shankar Singh, Resident of Village Gaudi Chawk, Ward No. 9, P.S. & District Araria .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Home Secretary the Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Collector, Araria
3. The Superintendent of Police, Araria
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Araria
5. Sanjay Kumar Ram, A.S.I., The Investigation Officer of Araria, P.S. Case No. 454/16, District - Araria .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Md. Nadim Seraj, G.P.-V =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 17-07-2017 The petitioner claims to be owner of Motorcycle bearing registration no. BR38H7392 which was seized in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 454 of 2016 registered for alleged violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The vehicle was confiscated by the Collector, Araria in Confiscation Case No. 28/2016-17 by order dated 25.10.2016.
The aforesaid order of confiscation has been challenged in this writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issue whether the Executive Authority can exercise power of a
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1020 of 2017 dt.17-07-2017 2/3 judicial authority to confiscate the vehicle is under sub-judice before a Larger Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 1647 of 2015 (Baleshwar Roy vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.). Hence, till disposal of the L.P.A. aforesaid, further proceeding in pursuance of the impugned order be stayed and the vehicle be released as ad interim custody in favour of the petitioner as no purpose is going to be served by its continued detention.
Learned counsel for the State-respondent submits that there is provision of appeal under Section 92(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 against the impugned order before the Commissioner, hence, the petitioner has got statutory remedy to ventilate his grievance.
Since the jurisdiction of the authority concerned (Executive Authority) to confiscate the vehicle is sub-judice before this Court, there is no reason to not grant the interim relief to the petitioner till adjudication of the aforesaid issue. Hence, it is ordered that the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed and shall be subject to the result of the L.P.A. aforesaid.
Let the referred vehicle be released in favour of the petitioner by way of ad interim custody on execution of surety bond (not in the form of bank guarantee) of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1020 of 2017 dt.17-07-2017 3/3 thousand) along with two sureties of the like amount with condition that the petitioner shall not dispose of the same without permission of the Court and shall produce as and when required. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Birendra Kumar, J) Kundan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 19.07.2017 Transmission Date 19.07.2017