The Patna High Court has held that a vehicle cannot be confiscated in the offense of transportation of illicit liquor unless there is material to show the owner’s involvement or connivance in the alleged illegal activity.
The case arose from a writ petition challenging an order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gopalganj, directing confiscation and auction of the petitioner’s motorcycle. The petitioner argued that the vehicle had been stolen months earlier and was later seized by authorities in connection with an alleged prohibition and excise offence involving transportation of illicit liquor.
Hearing both sides, the bench of Justice Mohit Kumar Shah and Justice Alok Kumar Pandey noted that the Respondent-State could not dispute that notice of the confiscation proceedings was not served upon the petitioner, as the ownership of the seized motorcycle had not been ascertained. The bench has further recorded that no material has been brought on record to show any direct or indirect involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offense.
Referring to the law laid down in the case of Sunaina vs. State of Bihar(2024 SCC Online Pat 851), the Court held that involvement or connivance of the owner of the vehicle in illegal use of the vehicle for ferrying illicit liquor is an essential prerequisite for confiscation of the vehicle or imposing any penalty for release of the vehicle.
Accordingly, the court has set aside the impugned order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and directed to release the motorcycle within two weeks.
Appearance:
For the Petitioner: Advocate Sumit Shekhar Pandey, Advocate Masoom Raza, Advocate Shruti Singh, Advocate Mirza Ahraz Baig.
For the Respondents: AC to Standing Counsel (11)
