2022 (3) TMI 1056 - HC - Central Excise

Maintainability of application - Confiscation of seized vehicle alongwith the goods - alternative remedy available under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 for filing civil appeal against the order of confiscation of vehicle - HELD THAT - It is relevant to mention that clause (e) of sub-Section (1) of Section 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 provides that whenever an offence is punishable under this Act, every animal, cart, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying such receptacle or package shall be liable to confiscation. The power of confiscation of vehicle has been given to the Collector of the District and sub-section 7 of Section 72 provides appeal against the order of confiscation under sub-section 2 or sub-section 6 of Section 72 to the Judicial Authority as the Government may appoint. There is no dispute that as per provisions of Section 72(7) of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, against the order of confiscation passed by the District Magistrate, Civil Appeal would lie before the District Judge of the respective District - the instant application is not liable to be entertained on account of having alternative statutory remedy available to the applicant - Application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash order for release of seized vehicle under Excise Act.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash an order rejecting the release of a seized vehicle. The vehicle, registered as UP-84-AH-0198, was confiscated by the District Magistrate in a case under Section 60 of the Excise Act. The applicant argued that keeping the vehicle in the police station would deteriorate its condition, urging its release. However, the AGA contended that the applicant had the option to file a civil appeal under the U.P. Excise Act against the confiscation order, rendering the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. not maintainable.

Upon examination, the court referred to Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, which allows for the confiscation of conveyances used in committing offenses under the Act. The power of confiscation is vested in the Collector of the District, with provisions for appeal to a Judicial Authority appointed by the State Government. Notably, the appellate judicial authority designated by the State Government for such matters is the District Judge. The court emphasized that appeals against confiscation orders should be treated as civil appeals, not criminal, to be decided by the District Judge.

Considering the facts presented, the court observed that the applicant had not challenged the confiscation order before the Appellate Court, as required by the statutory remedy available under the U.P. Excise Act. Consequently, the court concluded that the application lacked merit and dismissed it. However, the applicant was granted the option to file a civil appeal before the District Judge of Mainpuri, subject to the applicable laws of limitation. The judgment underscores the importance of following the prescribed legal procedures and utilizing the available statutory remedies in matters concerning the confiscation of vehicles under the U.P. Excise Act.