Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 475 (RAJ)

Gopesh Kumar Gupta v. State of Rajasthan

2004-03-26

N.N.MUTHUR

body2004
JUDGMENT 1. - By way of instant petition under Section 482 Cr.RC., the petitioner seeks to quash the order dated 29.1.2004 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaur rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. with respect to the release of seized liquor in C.R. Case No.59/2003 Excise Circle, Nagaur. 2. The petitioner claims to be the special power of attorney holder of M/s. Rajasthan Liquor Private Limited, Jaipur. The petitioner Company claims to hold import permit issued by the Excise Officer, Kaladera. In pursuance of the said permit, the liquor was being transported to Barmer via. Ajmer-Jodhpur in Truck No. RJ- 19-G-8230. The Excise Inspector intercepted the truck on 29.12.2003 at Nagaur. The truck was found carrying liquor without a route permit. The liquor 612 carrots (boxes) was seized by the officers of the Excise Department. A case has been registered against the officers of the Company for the offence under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act. The petitioner filed an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaur for release of 613 carrots of liquor. The learned Magistrate rejected the application on the ground that investigation is still pending and some of the accused persons are yet to be arrested, it appears that a revision petition has been filed against the said order of the learned Magistrate dated 29.1.2004 before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaur. It is submitted that the Presiding Judge is on leave and the case is not likely to be taken up and the licence period is ending on 31.3.2004. The petitioner has approached this Court under the provisions of Section 482 Cr.PC. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. 4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is holding an import permit. In view of this, it cannot be said that the petitioner was carrying illicit liquor. That may be a breach of the permit or violation of the some of the provisions of the Act. However, no useful purpose is going to be served by keeping the seized liquor in Malkhana. The purpose would be served if the seized liquor is delivered to the petitioner on 'Superdagi' on just and appropriate conditions. 5. That may be a breach of the permit or violation of the some of the provisions of the Act. However, no useful purpose is going to be served by keeping the seized liquor in Malkhana. The purpose would be served if the seized liquor is delivered to the petitioner on 'Superdagi' on just and appropriate conditions. 5. Consequently, the petition is allowed with the following directions:- (i) The order dated 29.1.2004 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaur is set aside; (ii) The revision petition being C.R.No. 15/2004 pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaur shall stand withdrawn on filing an application to that effect before the said court within a period of one week; (iii) The application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The seized liquor shall be delivered to the petitioner on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- and one surety bond of the like amount. It will be incorporated in the bond that petitioner will produce the liquor delivered to him on 'Superdagi' as and when he is called upon to do so. In case, he is not in a position to produce the same, he will deposit the amount as calculated by the Department of .Excise. Before seized liquor is given to the petitioner on 'Superdagi', the Department will issue a certificate assessing the value of seized liquor. Petition allowed. *******