1 2025:CGHC:25375 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1246 of 2025 1 - Vivek Mishra S/o Sanjay Mishra Aged About 25 Years Caste Brahmin, R/o Village Semra, P.S. Podi, Tehsil Kelhari, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.). ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.). ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Pavas Sharma, Adv. For State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Additional A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 18 /0 6 /202 5 1. Petitioner has preferred this petition against the impugned order dated 17.03.2025 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, District - Koriya (C.G.), in Criminal Revision No. 13/2025 whereby the learned Revisional Court has dismissed the petition affirming the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manendragarh, District – Koriya (C.G.), dated 10.02.2025 whereby Supurdnama case under Section 503 of B.N.S.S. presented by the petitioner has been rejected. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the registered owner of the seized vehicle car bearing Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.06.19 15:36:07 +0530 2 registration No. MP-65/Z-0151. The said vehicle has been seized in Crime No. 9/2025 by Police Station - Podi for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915. The said vehicle is alleged to have been found carrying 6.120 bulk litres of liquor on 31.01.2025, with the accused Lucky Mishra against whom 22 criminal cases have been registered, and the present petitioner is the real brother of the accused Lucky Mishra. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the legal owner of the vehicle and is entitled for the said vehicle. The Learned Court below has failed to consider the fact that it is of no use to keep such a seized vehicle at the police station for a long period, and could have passed an appropriate order immediately by taking a bond and guarantee, as well as security. He next submits that Crime No. 9/25 of Police Station Podi is not against him, and on the other Crime Nos. 93/24, 94/24 and 95/24, the aforesaid vehicle has never been seized. The documents of the vehicle have been submitted by him, and the alleged crime is registered against his brother, not against him. He also submits that he has not received any notice for confiscation from the concerned Collector. He also submits that the illegal act was committed by his brother, Lucky Mishra, without the knowledge of the petitioner. He lastly submits that the investigation is being carried on by the respondent authorities and at this stage, there is no requirement of the seized vehicle by them and if at any stage the same will be required, the petitioner is ready to produce the same. The petitioner is a bona fide owner of the vehicle; for his no fault and for wrong committed by others, he may not be penalised, therefore, the order passed by the revisional Court as well as by the Chief Judicial Magistrate is liable to be set aside. 3 4. The learned State counsel, opposing the petition and supported the orders passed by trial Court & revisional Court and submitted that a letter dated 06.03.2025 has been written by the concerned Superintendent of Police to the Collector for proceeding of confiscation of the alleged vehicle. He also submits that it is also alleged that the seized vehicle was used in the Crime Nos. 93/24, 94/24 and 95/24 registered at Police Station Podi, which have been registered against the petitioner. The petitioner and his brother are habitual offenders with the use of the vehicle in question; therefore, the vehicle may not be released. 5. Heard counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The vehicle used in the excise case is subject to confiscation. Lucky Mishra, accused of Crime No. 09/2025, registered at Police Station Podi, District- M.C.B. (C.G.), and petitioner Vivek Mishra are real brothers. Seizure proceedings of the said vehicle have to be made also in Crime Nos. 93/2024, 94/2024 and 95/2024, registered at the Police Station Podi against the petitioner. The reasons mentioned in paragraphs No. 9, 10 and 11 by the revisional Court in its order dated 17.03.2025 that the petitioner and his real brother Lucky Mishra are habitual offender and the vehicle in question is used for transportation of illegal contraband and other crimes, therefore, it is not appropriate to release the vehicle which is just and proper and does not call for any interference. 7. Accordingly, the instant CRMP is hereby dismissed at motion stage itself. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu