✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 22 Oct 2010

Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam, filed the present Criminal Revision Case. 2 & Ors. v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[1]

Criminal Revision Case No. 1918 of 2010GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA2 min read

Case at a glance

Decided
22 Oct 2010
Bench
GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. Having regard to the judgments passed by this Court in P.SWARUPA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[1], JITENDRA PALNITKER v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[2] and SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI v. STATE OF GUJARAT[3], though Section 46 E of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act states…
  • Para 44. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed, at the stage of admission, with a direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam, to release the Bajaj Auto bearing Registration No.AP-20-Y 1085 seized in C.O.R.No.312/2010-11 of Prohibition & Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, on condition of…

Judgment

- Petitioner, who was unsuccessful in getting the vehicle-Bajaj Auto bearing No.AP20Y 1085 released in Crl.M.P.Sr.No.4447 of 2010 in P.R.No.312 of 2010-11, filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C., before the

learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam, filed the present Criminal Revision Case.

2.

Petitioner herein is the owner of the said vehicle and, on

07.09.2010, while conducting route watch at Ambedkar Centre, BCM, the Excise officials of Prohibition & Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, found I.D. liquor from the vehicle of the petitioner and registered a case in C.O.R.No.312/2010-2011 under Section 7 (A) read with Section 8 (e) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 and seized the said vehicle. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate, requesting the Court for interim custody of the said vehicle. However, by docket order, dated 19-10-2010, the Court below returned the petition stating as to how it has jurisdiction to entertain the said application in view of the Bar under A.P. Excise Act.

3.

Having regard to the judgments passed by this Court in P.SWARUPA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[1], JITENDRA PALNITKER v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[2] and SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI v. STATE OF GUJARAT[3], though Section 46 E of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act states that there is a bar of jurisdiction to entertain any application pertaining to release of the vehicle, Section 31 of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 has an overriding effect over the A.P. Excise Act. In the light of the said provision of law, it shall be held that the learned Magistrate is empowered to pass orders under Section 451 Cr.P.C. and release the vehicle by way of interim custody.

4.

Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed, at the stage of admission, with a direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam, to release the Bajaj Auto bearing Registration No.AP-20-Y 1085 seized in C.O.R.No.312/2010-11 of Prohibition & Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, on condition of the petitioner furnishing security in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam. Further, petitioner shall give an undertaking that he shall not alienate the said vehicle and shall produce the same as and when required in connection with the said crime. ________________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 22nd October 2010 v v [1] 1996 (1) ALT Crl. 130 [2] 1995 (3) ALD 80 [3] (2002) 10 SCC 283

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 451, 457; Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 — ss. 7(A), 8(e), 31; A.P. Excise Act.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 22 Oct 2010. The bench was GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Criminal Revision Case No. 1918 of 2010). ← Search more judgments