WRIT PETITION 227 No.^^ /2012 v. Kanhaiya Lal Ratre
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed in part and instead of
Provisions considered
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. Writ Petition (227) No.265/2012 PETITIONER Kanhaiya Lat Ratre RESPONDENT Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Collector Raigarh (C.G.) Shri Amit Sharma, counsot for tho potitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, PL for the State. ORAL ORDER (5.07.2012) A Jimited prayer has been made jn this writ petition for modifying the condition imposed in the impugned order whereby the Cotlector, Raigarh has directed petitioner to furnish the bank guarantee of Rs.50,000/- at the time of obtaining interim custody of the two wheeler, Bajaj Discovery Motorcyde. The said vehicle was seized as it was involved in iliegal transportation of illicit (2) liquor on 3/09/2011. Petitioner moved an applicatjon under Section 47 of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 seeking interim custody of the vehide and the impugned order has been passed on the said application.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the condition imposed (3) by learned Collector is harsh and onerous. He would submit that the purchase value of the two wheeler was Rs.39.000/- in the year 2008 and by iapse of time its value is depreciating, the condition defeats very purpose of therefore imposition of obtaining supurdnama of the vehicle. ' On the other hand, tearned State counsei would submit that considering (4) nature of offence committed by the petitioner and for the fact that the petitioner may not produce the vehicle after its confiscation, the imposition of such condition is justified. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the considered (5) opinjon that the condition imposed in the impugned order is harsh and onerous. The Coliector may have rejected the prayer for grant of supurdnama, however, once the authority decides to release the vehide, the order should be given full effect and imposition of condition as has been imposect in the impugned order, infact amounts to denial of his prayer for grant of interim custody. tn a similar writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.
Operative part
1536/2011 (Awdheswar (6) Prasad Vs. State of C.G. & Another) reported in 2012 (1) C.G.L.J. 268 wherein reiease of the vehicle was directed on submission of fixed deposit, this court has "directed for release of the vehicle on furnishing local solvent security. -2- For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed in part and instead of (7) condition of is directed that on petitioner's furnishing personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for the like amount, subject vehicle shafl be released on supurdnama. furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.50,000/-, Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed in part and instead of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 — s. 47.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.