IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 15240 of 2000 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NANDIGAM KRISHNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 15240 OF 2000 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner is the owner of the Jeep bearing No. AET 7237 of Machendra make, 1986. He purchased the same by obtaining finance. While so, one Mr. Lavudiya Raju owner of a Kirana Shop engaged the said jeep for transporting the essential commodities from Beet Bazar, Warangal to his shop situated in Komatipalli Village. While transporting jaggery of 9 quintals and one bag of alum, the said jeep was seized by the first respondent and a case in Crime No. 53 of 2000 for offence under Section 34(e) of the A.P. Excise Act (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act”) was registered and remanded the driver and cleaner of the vehicle were remanded to judicial custody by producing them before IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Warangal, who has released them on bail and the said jeep was seized and produced before the Deputy Commissioner, Excise & Prohibition, Warangal, Warangal District, for initiating confiscation proceedings. Petitioner questions the said action of the respondents in seizing and registering a case for confiscation of Jeep as well as the goods. It is the case of the petitioner that neither jaggery nor alam are excisable articles and therefore, jeep was not involved in the offence. Under Section 34 A of the Act whoever in contravention of this Act or of any rule, notification or order made, issued or passed there under or of any licence or permit granted or issued under this Act, imports, exports, transports, manufactures, collects or possesses or sells any intoxicant or uses, keeps or has in his possession any materials, stills, utensils, implements or apparatus whatsoever for the purpose of manufacturing any intoxicant other than toddy, was also be liable for confiscation and under Section 45 of the Act any material, still, utensil implements or apparatus found for the purpose of manufacturing of any intoxicant or vehicle is also liable for confiscation. There is no dispute with regard to the transport. The question that arises for consideration is whether the persons were found transporting alam and jaggery and the possession of the same is legal or not. A1 is the accused. A3 is the owner of the Kirana shop. A2 is the cleaner of the vehicle. It is the case of the driver and the cleaner that the vehicle belongs to the petitioner K. Kesoju Vijay Kumar and they were transporting jaggery and alum as the said lorry was engaged by A3 owner of Kirana shop. The only allegation made in the FIR is that A3 used to sell jaggery and alum to the public on higher rate for making gudamba. The said alum and jaggery was not seized while selling to the public for the purpose of manufacturing illicit liquor or gudamba but while transporting the said alum and jaggery the vehicle was seized by the police. There is no allegation in the FIR that the said alum and Jaggery are being transported for the purpose of manufacturing of the illicit liquor. Therefore, it cannot be said that the said jaggery and alum are the material found for the purpose of manufacturing of illicit liquor. A general allegation was made in the FIR stating that the owner of the kirana shop used to sell for higher rate to the public for making gudamba. I am of the opinion that alum and jaggery are not excisable and there is no prohibition for sale and purchase of the same. While admitting the Writ Petition, this court directed the respondents to release the vehicle on the petitioner furnishing the security for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and as admittedly the owner, driver and cleaner have no knowledge about the activities of A3, I am of the opinion that the vehicle cannot be seized and retained. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Date: 31.03.2008 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Mahaboobnagar District at Mahaboobnagar. 2 The Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspector, Gadwal Circle at Gadwal, Mahaboobnagar District. 3 2CCs to. 4. 2CD copies