IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND TEN WRIT PETITION No.15223 of 2004 Between: Sri G.Siddaiah. … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri B.Pratap. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Prohibition & Excise. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Certiorari to quash orders, dated 27-7-2004 and 17-10-2003 passed by respondents 1 and 2 respectively. The petitioner is the owner of Auto bearing registration No. AP 2V 3501. On 15-8-2001 at about 10- 45 PM., the Sub-Inspector of Police, Thiruchanur Police Station, intercepted the said auto and during the checking he found 96 nips of XXX Rum were being transported illegally in the said auto. He then seized the said vehicle and the contraband, and registered a case in Crime No.142 of 2001 for the offence under Section 34(a) of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968. To the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner, he has submitted a reply, wherein he has raised two pleas, viz., that the liquor was duty paid and that he has no knowledge of commission of the said offence. Both respondents 1 and 2 rejected the said pleas. It was held that even if the liquor was duty paid, as there was no valid permit or bill, its transportation was illegal. Similarly, the plea of the petitioner that since he had no knowledge of commission of offence, the auto cannot be confiscated was also rejected. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that as the petitioner had no knowledge of the alleged Excise offence, the auto is not liable for confiscation. The issue whether knowledge or mens rea of the owner is necessary for confiscation of a vehicle involved in commission of an Excise offence is no longer res integra in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh and another Vs. Sharana Gouda – (2007) 6 SCC 42 - wherein the Supreme Court has taken into consideration the amendment to Section 45 of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968, which was brought into force with effect from 26-11-1993, whereby the proviso to the said Section was deleted. The Supreme Court held that with the deletion of the said proviso, the knowledge or mens rea on the part of the owner of the property is irrelevant and that the position has changed after omission of the said proviso. In view of the above mentioned judgment of the Supreme Court, the only plea raised by the petitioner that he had no knowledge of commission of offence is not worthy of acceptance. In the light of the above, I do not find any illegality in the orders passed by respondents 1 and 2. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. --------------------------------------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date: 08-7-2010 MNR