ORDER.- This is a petition to set aside the order of confiscation of the Ambassador car belonging to the petitioner. The petitioner is a resident of Thiruvanaikoil near Tiruchirapalli. The car was found on the night of 28th September, 1965 on the Cuddalore-Pondicherry road carrying over 500 bottles of brandy. It was driven by the driver of the petitioner and there were some strangers in it. They were convicted under the Prohibition Act for transport of the brandy. There was an order of confiscation of the car. The petitioner applied to the learned trial Magistrate to have the order set aside alleging that his driver took away the car without his knowledge, and during his absence, and that he had no knowledge that illicit brandy was going to be transported in the car. His version was that he went away on 26th September, 1965 to inspect his fields and returned only on 1st October, 1965 and he learned from his wife that the driver had taken away the car with her consent. In this connection, the petitioner admitted that the car used to be run as an illicit taxi. The suggestion, therefore, is that when the driver took away the car it was probably for using the car as illicit taxi. But even so, there was no evidence that the petitioner or his wife knew that the driver was going to allow the car to be used for transporting illicit brandy. On these facts, the learned Sub-Magistrate passed an order of confiscation, and that was confirmed by the learned District Magistrate, who proceeded on the footing that the petitioner had not satisfied the Court that he had exercised due care in preventing the commission of a prohibition offence, and that, that not having been proved to the satisfaction of the Court, it was not sufficient for the petitioner to show that he had no knowledge of the offence. That is how the learned District Magistrate has interpreted the scope of the proviso to section 14 of the Prohibition Act. That is how the learned District Magistrate has interpreted the scope of the proviso to section 14 of the Prohibition Act. I had however occasion to point out in a recent judgment of mine in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 922 of 1966 Mohanlal Shinlote (Petitioner) that this is not the scope of the proviso, and that, while it is true that the order of confiscation shall not be made if the owner satisfies the Court that he had exercised due care in preventing the commission of the prohibition offence, it does not follow that in a case where he is not able to satisfy the Court, the car should be confiscated even though there is no evidence to prove that the owner had knowledge that the prohibition offence was going to be committed by using the car. Normally an order of confiscation will be made only if there is reason to believe that the owner knew that the car was going to be used for transporting illicit liquor and committing an offence under the Prohibition Act. Thus it is clear that the learned Sub-Magistrate and the learned District Magistrate have proceeded on an incorrect view of the law. They themselves do not say that the petitioner had knowledge that the car was’ going to be used for a prohibition offence, and I am not able to find evidence sufficient to fasten the petitioner with such knowledge. Under these circumstances, the order of confiscation is set aside and the car will be returned to the petitioner. However, I may suggest to the authorities the desirability of enacting a provision in the Prohibition Act similar to the proviso to section 115 of the Customs Act (LII of 1962). Under that provision where a conveyance is used for the carriage of smuggled goods and is normally liable to confiscation under the main provisions of the section, an option shall be given to the owner to pay, in lieu of the confiscation a fine not exceeding the market price of the goods, which are sought to be smuggled. Such a provision would leave the Court with some discretion to impose a fine suitable to the circumstances of the case, instead of order in confiscation of the vehicles, which, in a particular case, may be too heavy a punishment. R.M. ------------ Order set aside.