Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.24856 of 2018 ====================================================== Pintu Kumar, Son of Pragash Yadav, Resident of Village- Mahuli, Sisma, P.S.- Nawada, District-Nawada .

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Nawada.

3.

The Superintendent of Police, Nawada 4.

The Officer-in-charge, Town Police Station, Nawada, District - Nawada. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Man Mohan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Kumar Manish- SC5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN) Date : 29-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner prays for provisional release of his Scorpio bearing registration No. BR27P1493, which has been seized in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 752 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The allegation against the petitioner is of drunken driving and in such condition, the vehicle has been seized. Undisputedly, there is no recovery from the vehicle as it is also confirmed from the seizure list.

Patna High Court CWJC No.24856 of 2018 dt.29-04-2019 2/2 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the legal positions settled by this Court in the case of Diwakar Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Excise Department & Ors. reported in 2018 (3) PLJR 403, we direct for release of the vehicle in question in favour of the petitioner within a fortnight, on furnishing/production of the document showing the ownership of the vehicle and registration certificate in the name of the petitioner supporting the claim of the petitioner before the Designated Court below because neither the F.I.R. nor the seizure list reflects any reason for proceeding to be continued against the vehicle in question. Since nothing has been recovered from the vehicle, there is no question of submission of any surety bond in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. With this observations/directions above, this writ petition is allowed.

(Jyoti Saran, J) ( Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Nasimul/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 07-05-2019 Transmission Date N/A