Case No.
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 35204 of 2024 (along with WP No. 11356/2024, WA No. 2763/2024, MCRC No. 6762/2024, WP No. 18164/2024, WP No. 18492/2024, MCRC
Bench
Suresh Kumar Kait CJ, Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari J, Vivek Jain J
Acts & Sections
M.P. Excise Act, 1915 §34(2)
M.P. Excise Act, 1915 §47-A
Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh… §4
Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh… §5
Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh… §6
Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh… §6A
Also reported in
This judgment disposed of connected matters. The same reasons were delivered in
the following 2 cases.
Rajesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Writ Petition No. 6542 of 2025 (with connected matters WP No. 11356/2024, WA No. 2763/2024, MCRC No. 6762/2024, WP No. 18164/2024, WP No. 18492/2024,
Headnote
AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
A Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court was constituted to resolve a divergence of opinion among coordinate Single Benches on the question whether the Collector/District Magistrate has the authority to pass an order of confiscation of a vehicle used in the commission of offences under the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 and the Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam, 2004 during the pendency of criminal trial before a Judicial Magistrate/Sessions Court. The reference arose from conflicting lines of Single Bench decisions—one relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in State of M.P. v. Madhukar Rao, (2008) 14 SCC 624, holding that no confiscation order could be passed during the pendency of criminal trial, while another line of cases took a contrary view.
The referred questions covered: (a) whether articles or vehicles can be confiscated under Section 47-A of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 during the pendency of a criminal trial; (b) whether confiscation proceedings under Section 11(5) of the Cow Progeny Act can be initiated and prosecuted simultaneously with the criminal trial before the Judicial Magistrate; (c) whether the constitutional validity of Section 47-A of the Excise Act was sustainable; and (d) whether writ petitions were maintainable against confiscation orders where statutory appellate remedies existed. W.P. No. 6542/2025, which challenged the constitutional validity of Section 47-A of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, was heard analogously.
The Full Bench took up all connected matters together since analogous questions of law arose in both the Excise Act batch and the Cow Progeny Act batch of cases, and pronounced a common judgment addressing the authority of the executive confiscating authority vis-à-vis the criminal court during the pendency of trial, the interplay of parallel proceedings, and related procedural questions.
Catchwords:
confiscation of vehicles · pendency of criminal trial · M.P. Excise Act 1915 · Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam 2004 · Collector's authority · District Magistrate · parallel proceedings · constitutional validity · writ maintainability · alternate remedy · stare decisis · conflicting benches · reference to larger bench
Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's
judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.
