Arvind Kumar Tiwari @ Arvind v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9826 of 2020 ====================================================== Arvind Kumar Tiwari @ Arvind, Son of Kailash Nath Tiwari @ Kailash, resident of Village Sabha Kharagpur (Chak Kharawan) Sadho Ghat, P.S. Badagaon, District - Vaishali, (U.P.).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The District Magistrate and Collector, Rohtas, District Rohtas. 3.

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Natwar, P.S. Natwar, District Rohtas. 4.

Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Natwar P.S. Natwar, District - Rohtas. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Vivek Prasad, G.P. 7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) Date : 24-05-2021 Heard the parties.

Petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- "(i) For the release of the petitioner's Bolero vehicle of white colour bearing Registration No. U.P. 65 C.D.

8530, Chassis No. MA1 XA2 GHKG5A43805, Engine No. GHF4 M63771 which admittedly belongs the petitioner as reported by the respondent no. 3 in his report dated

Patna High Court CWJC No.9826 of 2020 dt.24-05-2021 2/3 10.03.2019 made in pursuance of the order dated 06.03.2019 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II cum Special Judge Excise, Rohtas rejected on 06.04.2019 the petitioner petition dated 17.11.2018 for the release of the aforesaid vehicle to him."

It is submitted on behalf of counsel for the state that confiscation proceeding was initiated against the seized vehicle in which notices were issued to the petitioner but he did not appear before the Confiscating Authority and final order of confiscation has been passed on 22nd of September, 2020 in Confiscation Case No. 138 of 2019.

It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that no notice was ever served upon petitioner.

Writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a petition before the Confiscating Authority for recall of the order on the ground that there was no service of notice upon him and, if any, such petition is filed within six weeks, the Collector shall examine the record and if he finds that notices were not validly served upon the petitioner, he shall

Patna High Court CWJC No.9826 of 2020 dt.24-05-2021 3/3 recall the ex-parte order and shall pass fresh order after giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and if Collector/Confiscating Authority finds that notices were validly served upon the petitioner and in spite of valid service he did not appear, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file appeal before the appellate authority against the order dated 22.09.2020 passed in Confiscation Case No. 138/2019 passed by the Confiscating Authority.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) veena/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date Transmission Date NA