c>A(^ XN THE HIOH GOUBT O? JUBSeATUtgS AT BIIASPUB (CO). ./•---:" 1 2. WRIT PBTITZON N0,, BETWEai 3 OF 2004 Smto'iTaswinder Kaur W/o Pyara singii. aged about 42 years .resident o£ B,H.Y, Charoada Bhilai Biste-i.et Darg (C6)i. PETITIONBR AND iKi The State of Chhatfelsgarh.throagh fehe gecretary DeparSment oS Bxelse, Mantralay »i3.K.s.Bu.i.lding Raipur (CG), GolleGtor, RaApur, Blsferict Raipur. / ^SBONDENTS WRIT PiP'ITION UHDERARTIC&ES 2"26/22'7 O? THE CONSTITHTIOH OF-XNjMA' •---. ~ .- . ., • • . - - ' . . .' .. . - . > XI-HC-22 a.n^r^i R-li* aiiSRi 5r»+i ^(T?a T°g '<) l<<l<?)*ly ®fll<(-ilre,PtCTi'My .^R^r.xR^,, ^•f.^SQ- \S-iS^-tw^ «<l*(?IT?Sb11<*> -m, fa'b<tW 311^1 ^wiwite 24-8-2004 eoiluisel Pariel Shri Yogesh Paadey, Shri Bhaskar Pyasi, Heard oii adniission. The petitioaer Siut. ofTruck havtag Registration I( petition tieiug aggrieved by tK^ Respondent No.2 CoUectQr The brief facts leading 21.11.2001 on receiving the fhe Station House QfScer, went on fhe ring road aad course of that checkmg, were also checked aad it eartoons aud 200. cartoons no permit for canyiag the offence was registered at Crrn^e were amested. Since the req4 trucka and Uquor, the CoUector aad ia that appUcation for releasiag the Leamed CoUectpr vide Mnpug^K truck on fb.e conditions condition was to furrdsh baAk +l'4l^l'tft7I; HWv^ ^ Js'<t •t.l^l'^.x ^ S^Sf SV^S for fhe petitioner. Lawyer for the State/ respondents. Jasliwiader Kaur who clai:ms tb be owner fo. M.I.S. 8199 haspreferred fhis writ l<|; order dated 28.1.2002 passed by the Rajpur. filirig ofthis writ petition are that on jliformation fi-om the reliable sources, Station- KhaDitarai alQng wifh staff checking fhe trucks. Duriiig fhe Nos. M.K.S. 8824 an^d M.I.S. 8199 WEJS found fhat they were carryuig 250 iglish wine respectively. As fhere was Rajp tb Police stfcrted Trudk WElS Efa litiuor fhe trucks were seized aad the /' pr^ceedi prec^duij No. 338/2001 aad accused persons test was m.ade for confiscation of the (|)ceediags were initiated before the the petttioner hereiu filed an truck ta question on supurdgiQama. ,^ied order directed for releasiug of fhe in tih.e said order, olie of such guarantee for one year as per the inentioned r^ [•!ft?^RgA XI-HC-22 sfiiSr^i Rt-li<b;5flliRI ^THW ^TI^a T-yv ~t_- /I /I ly'A ffif '3^';'l'I?I@te;s^'9'lei, I'fCTl'fly- 3TT^T V^R *11«CIIa'W'h "^ 200 'fN^? siiSra^iiwste eurrent valuati.Gn of die truckl was left at fhe discretion oftht Leanied counsel for th^ arbitTaiv, the petitioner is 'a j: fhe truck she is tmable to ^iinush the Baiik guarantee. Further argumeat oflearaed couiisel of the order dt: 28.1.2002 bv Magistrate First Class, Raip passed in Crimiiial Case No. for ftie petitioner is that after passi(ig jttie leamed Collector, leamed Judicjal |ir vide judgmeat dated 18.11.2002 |4/ 2002 (Aanexure P/4) acquitted tbe accused persons ofthe charg^s under seetion 34(1)(2) dffhe Excise Act and section 25 bftheAna; In view of the aforesaid for the petitioner, 'this CoUrt questibn or to inove before fiiiaUy. CousequeiiflyM(W5P N st^nd disposed of. ^NWN WRff'? fs^S <tait(l< ^)'3lPOT~CT^r arid fhe current valuatiori of the truck R.T.O. • petitioner subnuts that this order is >6or lady and as per the valuation of Act.' . .! . ' '. . ; •• ' . subinission niade bv leamed counsel is of the opiEdbn that fhe petitioner ougUt to have inoved to the ti|ial Court for releasiag ofthe truck in he CoUector for luodification of fhe order, if she so advised,'as t}ie judginent has beeii passed ia the crisuiial case ia wIiiGh, the trjuck ui question was aUeged to have been involved. More over the jjmpugned drder was for one year and tlie same has elapsed, aad n^thiag has been meationed about the present position. With the above observa^ion this petition stands disposed of . 1738/2004 and I.A.No. 4532/2004 Sd/- LC.Bhadoo • Judge [TT®''?re4