Bombay High Court Directs Release Of Seized Gutka And Pan-Masala On Furnishing The Bank Guarantee Of Rs. 27.84 Lakhs

Mariya Paliwala

4 March 2023 12:30 PM GMT

  • Whatsapp
  • Linkedin
  • Whatsapp
  • Linkedin
  • Whatsapp
  • Linkedin
    • Whatsapp
    • Linkedin
    • Whatsapp
    • Linkedin
    • Whatsapp
    • Linkedin
  • Bombay High Court Directs Release Of Seized Gutka And Pan-Masala On Furnishing The Bank Guarantee Of Rs. 27.84 Lakhs

    The Bombay High Court has directed to release the Gutka and Pan-Masala, which were banned in the state of Maharashtra, after furnishing the bank guarantee of Rs. 27,84,000The single bench of Justice Kishore C. Sant has modified the order passed by the Revisional Court by adding an additional condition that the respondent shall furnish the bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 27,84,000 instead...

    The Bombay High Court has directed to release the Gutka and Pan-Masala, which were banned in the state of Maharashtra, after furnishing the bank guarantee of Rs. 27,84,000

    The single bench of Justice Kishore C. Sant has modified the order passed by the Revisional Court by adding an additional condition that the respondent shall furnish the bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 27,84,000 instead of furnishing an indemnity bond of Rs. 61,44,000

    The respondent was found transporting gutka (or pan masala), which is banned in Maharashtra. The goods were seized in Dhule on April 1, 2012. The goods were manufactured in December 2021, and the best-before date is six months from the date of manufacture. The goods were manufactured in December 2022.

    The respondent contended that the goods in fact have not expired; it is only their "best before date, before which they are to be consumed, so in any case the goods can be released. There is no evidence of prosecution that the goods were to be sold in the state of Maharashtra.

    The respondent submitted a "Tax Invoice’ showing that the goods were to be transported from Faridabad in the State of Haryana to Bangalore in the State of Karnataka. He has even paid the GST. There is no other way to go to Bangalore (Karnataka) from Faridabad (Haryana) except by way of the state of Maharashtra. In any case, when he is the owner of the goods, he cannot be deprived of them merely because the prosecution is pending and prays for the rejection of the petition.

    The court has partly allowed the petition and modified the conditions imposed by the Sessions Court.

    Case Title: State of Maharashtra Versus Mahabal Enterprises

    Citation: Criminal Writ Petition No. 66 Of 2023

    Date: 27.02.2023

    Counsel For Petitioner: D. S. Jape

    Counsel For Respondent: Deshpande

    Click Here To Read The Order


    Next Story