Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Goutam Bhaduri

JUDGMENT

Goutam Bhaduri, J.

1. Instant petition is against the order dated 25/01/2016 passed by the Collector, Raigarh wherein an application for interim custody of vehicle preferred by the petitioner while the proceeding under the confiscation was continuing was dismissed.

2. Facts of this case are that on 1/08/2015 an information was received by the police of Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh that the alleged vehicle i.e. CG/13/UD/7609 was being used for transportation of illicit liquor. On such information, raid was conducted and the vehicle when was intercepted, from the vehicle 7.8 liters of beer and 12 bottles of whisky total 16.8 bulk liters of liquor was recovered. Having asked for the valid documents, no documents pertaining to such liquor was produced, therefore crime bearing number 224/2015 was registered under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915 and the liquor as also the vehicle was seized by the police. It was alleged by the State that the vehicle was being used for transporting illicit liquor as such proceeding under Section 47 (A) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 was drawn for confiscation of vehicle. Further the collector, who is authorised under the section 47-A started confiscation proceeding for the vehicle. During such confiscation proceeding, an application was filed by petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle till the confiscation proceedings are concluded. Said prayer for release of the vehicle for interim custody was dismissed by an order dated 25/01/2016. Therefore, this instant petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that confiscation proceeding though having been commenced it do not put any bar to release the vehicles on interim custody. He placed his reliance in case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat reported in MANU/SC/1110/2002 : (2002) 10 SCC 283 and would submit that applying such principle till confiscation proceeding is concluded, the vehicle should have been handed over to the applicant. It is submitted that no necessary useful purpose would be served by keeping the vehicle in the custody except the loss caused to it. It is further submitted that charge sheet having been filed no further enquiry is necessary in respect of criminal case and as such vehicle should have been released in favour of applicant.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer.

5. Perused the order dated 25/01/2016. Perusal of the order would engrafts the reasoning that since vehicle was seized while it was being used for transportation of the illicit liquor as such it is not justified to hand over the possession of the vehicle. In a result the application for interim custody was dismissed.

6. The confiscation proceeding under Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 is governed by Section 47-A of the Act. The section 47 (2) of it regulates the power and procedure to be adopted for confiscation which reads as under:-

"47 (2) When the Collector, upon production before him of intoxicants, articles, implements, utensils, materials, conveyance etc. or on receipt of a report about such seizure as the case may be, is satisfied that an offence covered by clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 34 has been committed and where the quantity of liquor found at the time or in the course of detection of such offence exceeds five bulk liters he may, on the ground to be recorded in writing, order the confiscation of the intoxicant, articles, implements, utensils, materials, conveyance etc. so seized. He may, during the pendency of the proceedings for such confiscation also pass an order of interim nature for the custody, disposal etc. of ........