[Rajasthan Excise Act] Bar U/S 69 On Release Of Seized Vehicle Applies To Vehicle Carrying Contraband, Not To Escorting Vehicle: High Court

Rajasthan High Court has iterated that the embargo under Section 69 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 on the powers of a criminal court won't be applicable when the seized vehicle was merely an escort for the vehicle that was originally carrying the contraband. The single judge bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal also clarified that the bar under Section 69(6) preventing the release of seized vehicles by a judicial magistrate will operate only if it was utilised for carrying receptacles or packages contravening the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950.“…if the vehicle/conveyance is not found to be used to carry receptacles or package yet has been seized under the Rajasthan Excise Act, the proper remedy seeking to release such vehicle/conveyance would lie before the Court by way of filing an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. and the embargo envisaged under Section 69 either under Section 69(2-B) or sub-section 6, would not apply against such vehicle/conveyance…”, the bench sitting at Jaipur observed.Before reaching the above inference, the court cited its previous decisions in Rakesh v. State of Rajasthan (2019) and Kana Ram v. State of Rajasthan (2011) for support.In this case, a Bolero Jeep was merely following the container carrying the liquor, and such a vehicle was not liable to be confiscated by the Excise Officer, as held by the High Court in the order. However, the court clarified that the factual aspect of the involvement of the vehicle needs to be verified from the record by the Magistrate before passing any orders to release the jeep.The High Court also criticized how casually and mechanically the Metropolitan Magistrate No.8, Jaipur Metropolitan-II dismissed Section 457 Cr. P.C application preferred by the petitioner in connection with offences under Sections 19/54, 54-A Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950.“….This Court finds that the Judicial Magistrate while dealing with the petitioner's application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. has not dealt with the factual and legal aspect attracted herein and has dismissed the application by passing a cryptic order which is bereft of reasonings on the clinching points, which ought to have been addressed by the Magistrate, to decide the application effectively and judiciously”, the court added before remanding the matter under Section 457 Cr. P.C. back to the trial court for fresh adjudication on merits.The Judicial Magistrate did not examine whether the vehicle in question was an escorting vehicle or whether it was being used for transporting the liquor, Justice Bansal emphasised. No report in this regard was called from the concerned police station, the High Court observed after perusing the lower court records. It was also pointed out by Justice Bansal that no discussion has taken place regarding the embargo under Section 69(6) of the Rajasthan Excise Act to exercise the magistrate's jurisdiction to release the vehicle seized for the aforesaid offences.“….Above referred points are the key stone to consider and decide the application filed by petitioner and non-adherence to the fundamental and basic points, renders the impugned order a non speaking, unreasoned or cryptic in nature…”, inferred Justice Bansal.Citing the above reasons, the court held that the petition under Section 457 Cr. P.C. will stand revived before the judicial magistrate for passing a reasoned and speaking order. The court also added that the application must be expeditiously disposed of since it pertains to the release of the vehicle on supurdginama.Advocate Vinod Kumar Sharma appeared for the petitioner. Public Prosecutor Laxman Meena represented the respondent state.Case Title: Rajendra Kumar Saini v. State of Rajasthan Through PPCase No: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1534/2024Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 51Click Here To Read/ Download Order

[Rajasthan Excise Act] Bar U/S 69 On Release Of Seized Vehicle Applies To Vehicle Carrying Contraband, Not To Escorting Vehicle: High Court

Sebin James

Tags