Compiled by Adv Mir Nagman Ali, Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur 9028401027/8380069591
SOME IMPORTANT CITATIONS ON CONFISCATION PROCEEDINGS AND SUPRATNAMA
State Of M.P. & Ors. Vs. Madhukar Rao2008 ALL SCR 470
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), Ss.39(d), 50 (as amended in 1991) - Criminal P.C. (1973), S.451 - Release of seized vehicle - Accused borrowing vehicle on pretext of going to see his ailing father - Owner of vehicle was not in vehicle at time of checking and was not an accused in the case - Four persons occupying vehicle arrested and vehicle and contraband seized - Held, S.50 as amended did not in any way affect the Magistrate's power to make order of interim release of vehicle under S.451 of the code - Section 39(d) cannot be used against exercise of power to release vehicle during pendency of trial.
Nawalkishor S/O. Goverdhandasji Rathi Vs. State Of Maharashtra & Anr.2006 ALL MR (Cri) 162
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), Ss.48A, 51, 48 - Forest Act (1927), Ss.42, 41, 2(4)(iii), 61-A to 61-G - Bombay Forest (Amendment) Transit Rules (1999), Rr.66, 129 - Confiscation of truck - Truck involved in transportation of carcass of a wild pig - Prosecution against accused under S.48 of Wild Life (Protection) Act - Application for release of truck - Can be made to Magistrate - Right of petitioner the owner of vehicle to claim the vehicle does not stand foreclosed, if the petitioner is successful in convincing the Trial Court that he had no knowledge that the truck was likely to be used for carrying forest produce in contravention of the Forest Act - Magistrate to issue notice to the petitioner at the stage when he would propose to pass an order of forfeiture under S.51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act. AIR 1998 SC 2927 - Referred to. (Paras
Jagjeet Singh Vs. State Of Maharashtra2013 ALL MR (Cri) 846
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), Ss.50, 51 - Seizure of truck - Truck involved in carrying cement and spotted deer - Owner of truck, not accused and offence committed without his knowledge - Alleged offence committed by driver and cleaner - Not the case by officer that spotted deer was killed either by driver or cleaner - Owner/applicant not aware of activities by driver or cleaner - Truck released on execution of bond.
Ravindra S/O. Bapunath Tayade Vs. State Of Maharashtra & Anr.2007 ALL MR (Cri) 3108
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), Ss.39, 50, 51 - Property of State Government - Seized vehicle - Seized vehicles would become the property of the State Government only when after the trial relevant accused are held guilty for the offences charged and vehicles are proved to have been used in commission of offence. 2000(1) M.P.L.J. 289 - Rel. on. (Para
Nitin S/O. Nathurao Gajbhiye & Anr. Vs. State Of Maharashtra2013 ALL MR (Cri) 912
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), Ss.39, 6(1)(2), 9 - Penal Code (1860), Ss.279, 337, 427 - Motor Vehicles Act (1988), S.184 - Criminal P.C. (1973), S.482 - Seizure of truck - Illegal transportation of meat in the truck - FIR does not disclose any offence punishable under S.39 of Wild Life Act - Police officers not aware of the provisions of Act for seizure - Truck needs to be released on execution of bond.
Vasant s/o. Annarao Bhosle Vs. The State of Maharashtra2016 ALL MR (Cri) 2788
Essential Commodities Act (1955), Ss.3, 6E - Criminal P.C. (1973), Ss.452, 456, 457 - Bar of jurisdiction - Interim custody of food articles - Provisions of special law i.e. Essential Commodities Act will apply - Even though there are provision like Ss.456, 457 Cr.P.C., that cannot be invoked by criminal court.
Hasankhan S/O. Sherkhan Pathan Vs. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.2014 ALL MR (Cri) 1395
Criminal P.C. (1973), S.457 - Essential Commodities Act (1955), Ss.3, 7 - Interim custody of seized goods - Entitlement - Food grain i.e. wheat belonging to petitioner, seized on suspicion of offence under E.C. Act - In view of legal position that confiscation proceeding under E.C. Act debars jurisdiction of Magistrate u/s.457 Cr. P.C., interim custody of wheat denied - However, there was no evidence to indicate that confiscation had commenced under E.C. Act - District Supply Officer (DSO) had not filed any report in this respect - Held, non-filing of report by DSO should not disfavour the petitioner - When claim of petitioner that no notice of confiscation received by him, was not controverted by DSO or investigating agency, Magistrate ought to have exercised its powers u/s.457 - Petitioner entitled to interim custody. (Paras
Vitthal Pandurang Navle Vs. State Of Maharashtra2003 ALL MR (Cri) 1952
Essential Commodities Act (1955), Ss.6A, 6B and 6E - Criminal P.C. (1973), Ss.451, 457 - Release of vehicle seized for violation of provision of Act - Release of vehicle - Bar under S.6-E during pendency of confiscation proceedings - Mere information by Police to Collector about seizure of vehicle and registration of case does not amount to commencement of confiscation proceedings - Bar to release vehicle does not come into operation till then.
State Of Maharashtra Vs. Mohd. Safi S/O. Noor Mohd. Shaikh1999 ALL MR (Cri) 1121
Forest Act (1927), Ss.52(1) and 61G - Release of property seized - Timber logs seized from accused - Release - Jurisdiction is vested in specified authorities - Magistrate cannot direct for return of property on supratnama under S.457 Cri. P.C.
State Of Maharashtra Vs. Manishkumar S/O Babulal Biyani1998 ALL MR (Cri) 89
Criminal P.C. (1973), Ss.457, 451 - Essential Commodities Act (1955), Ss.6A, 6E - LPG Cylinders - Seizure by Police - Confiscation proceedings not pending before Collector or State Govt. - Disposal of cylinders - Criminal Court not barred from exercising jurisdiction under S.457 r/w 451.
The State Of Maharashtra Vs. Bahadursingh Gulbartsingh1999 ALL MR (Cri) 1096
Bombay Prohibition Act (1949), S.132 - Criminal P.C. (1973), S.457 - Property attached in prohibition raid - Prohibition Officer not producing property before Magistrate nor making report to Collector that property attached was not required in evidence but was liable to be confiscated - In fact there was no explanation whatsoever for detaining the property in his custody - Held in the circumstances magistrate was justified in ordering release of property to accused. (Para
State Of Maharashtra Vs. Manishkumar S/O Babulal Biyani1998 ALL MR (Cri) 89
Criminal P.C. (1973), Ss.457, 451 - Essential Commodities Act (1955), Ss.6A, 6E - LPG Cylinders - Seizure by Police - Confiscation proceedings not pending before Collector or State Govt. - Disposal of cylinders - Criminal Court not barred from exercising jurisdiction under S.457 r/w 451.
State Of U.P. & Anr.Vs. Lalloo Singh2007 ALL MR (Cri) 2076 (S.C.)
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), S.50(1) - Criminal P.C. (1973), S.457 - Offence under the Act - Seizure and disposal of property - S.457 of Cr.P.C. has no application - There is marked distinction between police officers and officials under the Act. (Paras
Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), Ss.50(1), (4), 39(1)(d) - Seized property - Application for temporary release of custody - Seized property becomes property of the State Government when it is used for commission of offence under the Act and is seized - On appropriate case on consideration of material placed before Magistrate by authorised officer to whom intimation under sub-section (4) is given about seizure, prayer for release or custody may be rejected. (Para
No comments:
Post a Comment