IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 3480 of 2005 Between: A. Anna Dorai, S/o Veeranna Dorai, R/o Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal Division at Warangal. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order dt. 18-12-2004 made in CR.No. 3756/2004/CPE/D4, passed by the 1st respondent in confirming the order dated 31-10-2003 in RC.NO. 1454/2002/P&E/B1, passed by the 2nd Respondent whereunder the vehicle bearing No. AP-20U 9836 belonging to the petitioner was confiscated as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice consequently direct the respondents to release the Auto as well as the Bank Guarantee furnished for release of Vehicle and pass such other order or orders in the interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{AVLR} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.3480 OF 2005 ORDER: The petitioner is the owner of the goods auto bearing No.AP 20 U 9836. It is stated that while the said auto was transporting 10 gunny bags of black jaggery by its driver V.Andi Kumar @ V.Kumaraswamy S/o Veeranna from Manikanta Traders, Bhadrachalam to the shop of Erapu Chinna Raju @ Chirraju S/o Babu Rao of Gollagutta village on 29-7-2002, the Prohibition and Excise Inspector Bhadrachalam Station seized the Auto and registered a case in Crime No.258 of 2002-03 for the offence punishable under Section 34(e) and 39 of the A.P.Excise Act, 1968. Based on the said seizure report, an application has been filed by the Prohibition and Exicse Inspector, Bhadrachalam Station before the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal Division for confiscation of the said vehicle and the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal issued a show cause notice to the petitioner, but it is stated that no explanation has been filed by the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner was under confusion with regard to the show cause notice and release of the vehicle for interim custody as admittedly, the interim custody of the said vehicle was given in the month of August, 2002 and the alleged show cause notice was also served in the month of August, 2002, but however, the contents of the application for grant of interim custody was considered while passing the order and the confiscation order has been passed mainly on the confessional statement of the driver of the said vehicle namely V.Andi Kumar who is said to have been stated that the said black jaggery is being transported from Manikanta Traders, Bhadrachalam to the shop of Erapu Chinna Raju and the said Erapu Chinna Raju purchased the said jaggery for the purpose of sale to the manufacturers of I.D.liquor. I am of the opinion that based on the sole confessional statement of the driver, it cannot be said that the petitioner had knowledge about the use of the black jaggery and the said retail purchaser Erapu Chinna Raju of Gollagutta used to sell the said jaggery to the manufacturers of I.D.liquor. It is not known who is the manufacturer of the I.D.liquor and the so-called confessional statement has been established in any manner. The confessional statement of an accused is not admissible in evidence under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, except to the extent of recovery of the material received from the information of the accused. In the instant case, the so-called confessional statement has not at all been established with regard to the person to whom the said retailer Erapu Chinna Raju used to sell the black jaggery for the manufactur of I.D.liquor. Admittedly black jaggery is not a prohibited article or it is prohibited under Excise Act. Only in respect of intoxicating liquors, the sale and possession is prohibited without obtaining any licence or permission. No licence or permission is required from the Excise authorities either for sale or purchase of the black jaggery. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the confiscation of the goods auto of the petitioner on the alleged confessional statement of the driver relating to the transportation of the black jaggery, which is not regulated under the A.P.Excise Act or A.P. Prohibition Act is illegal and arbitrary. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise also without any appreciation of the contentions, simply confirmed the order quoting Section 45 of the A.P. Excise Act as if black jaggery is used in the manufacture of intoxicating liquor which is prohibited by the A.P.Excise Act. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the confiscation order is un-sustainable and illegal and accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, setting aside the confiscation order. The bank guarantee or the security as the case may be furnished by the petitioner shall be returned. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Date: 14-07-2008. Shr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal Division at Warangal. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. 4.2CCs to 5.2CD copies