Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 335 (JHR)

Tripti Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2021-03-23

AMITAV K.GUPTA

body2021
JUDGMENT : Amitav K. Gupta, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order dated 19.06.2020 passed by the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar in Cri. Misc. Application No.638 of 2020, rejecting the prayer for release of truck bearing registration No.BR-01GH-0866, in favour of the petitioner, in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No.595 of 2019, registered under Sections 420, 414, 408, 409, 467, 468, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short E.C. Act). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by order dated 12.03.2020, the court below had ordered for release of 160 drums of bitumen in favour of the owner/ purchaser of the bitumen. It is submitted that in the F.I.R., it is not mentioned as to which order under the provisions of E.C Act was violated, therefore the confiscation proceeding initiated by the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar with respect to the truck, is in contravention of the provisions of E.C. Act. It is submitted that the court below has rejected the petition for release of the truck on the ground that in the challan, E-way bill number and Eff. was not mentioned, as such there was no valid documents for transportation of the goods on the truck. It is submitted that the petitioner is the registered owner of the truck which is lying in an uncared manner in the premises of police station, for more than a year. Accordingly, prayer has been made to set aside the order dated 19.06.2020, and to release the truck bearing registration No.BR01GH-0866, in favour of the petitioner 3. Learned A.P.P., while opposing the prayer for release of the truck, has submitted that it would be evident that confiscation proceeding has been initiated under Section 6-A(c) of the E.C. Act, by the Deputy Commissioner and notice of the proceeding has been served upon the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner should appear before the competent authority, i.e., the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar, and raise the points, in her defence, as enumerated in this revision before the competent authority. It is submitted that Section 6-E of the E.C. Act bars the jurisdiction of the court for release of vehicle or goods for which confiscation proceeding has been initiated by the competent authority under the Act. 4. Heard. It is submitted that Section 6-E of the E.C. Act bars the jurisdiction of the court for release of vehicle or goods for which confiscation proceeding has been initiated by the competent authority under the Act. 4. Heard. At the very outset, it is pertinent to take note, of the fact, that the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, by order dated 12.03.2020 had ordered for release of 160 drums of bitumen after recording its satisfaction that said bitumen were purchased on valid documents from Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. It is evident that the prayer for release of the truck was rejected solely on the ground that in the challan E-way bill number and Eff. was not mentioned, consequently the goods could not be transported on the truck and the confiscation proceeding was initiated by the Deputy Commissioner on the basis of information of Superintendent of Police. At this juncture, it is necessary to state that Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, provides for confiscation of vehicle or conveyance found to be carrying goods without E-way bill. As noticed, the confiscation proceeding was not initiated under Section 130 of the S.G.S.T. Act rather the proceeding has been initiated under Section 6-A(c) of the E.C. Act. It is not disputed that 160 drums of bitumen, which were being transported on the aforesaid truck, were ordered to be released as the documents relating to purchase of bitumen were found to be valid and genuine. Now, the question whether in the facts and circumstances the confiscation proceeding could have been initiated under Section 6-A(c) of the E. C. Act, in the absence of violation/ contravention of any order/ notification by the State Authority requires determination by the competent authority before whom the confiscation proceeding is pending. 5. It appears that till date no order has been passed in the aforesaid confiscation proceeding and the truck is lying under the open sky in an uncared manner in the premises of the police station. The truck is exposed to the vagaries of weather and over a period of time the vehicle will be damaged and become a junk. 5. It appears that till date no order has been passed in the aforesaid confiscation proceeding and the truck is lying under the open sky in an uncared manner in the premises of the police station. The truck is exposed to the vagaries of weather and over a period of time the vehicle will be damaged and become a junk. It is well settled that detention of commercial vehicle for a long period in the premises of the police station will not serve any purpose, as it will not only cause loss to the owner but also cause a loss of revenue to the State Exchequer due to non-pliance of the commercial vehicle. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application, along with relevant documents, in the court below. If the application is so filed, the court below shall call for a report from the District Transport Officer and the Investigating Officer regarding the genuinity of the documents and if the papers are found to be in order, the court below shall order for release of the truck bearing registration No.BR-01GH-0866, in favour of the petitioner on furnishing an indemnity bond of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) with two sureties of like amount each. One of the sureties should be an owner of a transport vehicle. The petitioner shall give an undertaking and guarantee that :- (i) she shall not sale, mortgage or transfer the ownership of the vehicles on hire purchase agreement or mortgage or in any other manner. (ii) the custody of the vehicles shall be subject to the order to be passed by the court on conclusion of trial; (iii) she shall not alter or tamper with the identification of the vehicle in any manner (iv) she shall produce the vehicle before the competent authority as and when directed by the court; 7. Before release of the vehicle, the court below shall direct the police to prepare a panchnama and take the photographs of the vehicle. The court below is at liberty to impose any other terms and conditions which it deems fit and proper. 8. It is made clear that this order shall not bar the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar from proceeding in the confiscation proceeding. The petitioner shall appear and file her reply in the aforesaid confiscation proceeding. The court below is at liberty to impose any other terms and conditions which it deems fit and proper. 8. It is made clear that this order shall not bar the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar from proceeding in the confiscation proceeding. The petitioner shall appear and file her reply in the aforesaid confiscation proceeding. The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar shall decide the matter on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. 9. With the said direction the impugned order dated 19.06.2020 passed by the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, in Criminal Misc. Application No.638 of 2020, is, hereby, set aside. 10. In the result this revision is, hereby, allowed. Revision allowed.