N.N. Sharma, J. - (1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 19 -11 -1979 by Sri Ram Behari Lal learned Sessions Judge, Kanpur in Criminal Appeal No. 141/M of 1979 by which the appeal was dismissed and the order of Collector, Kanpur dated 20 -8 -1979 about confiscation of truck No. UPA/4602 under Sec. 72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 was upheld.
(2.) This revision arose under following circumstances. It appears that the revisionist is a transporter in Kanpur city. He had his office in Bombay also. It was on 21 -4 -1979 that one consignment of 75 bales of cloth was booked by M/s. Sidh Gopal Amar Nath, 623 Kishore Building, Bombay for Kanpur in the name of M/s. Kamal Brothers, Kanpur who were the consignees of the aforesaid goods ; 22 drums were also booked as containing solvent oil. At the time of checking by Excise Inspector Sri S.K. Awasthi on Kalpi Road at the Excise Barrier on 21 -4 -1979 it was detected that the drums contained 4510 litres illicit liquor and 75 bales of cloth; the matter was reported to the Collector, Kanpur by Excise Authorities. The contention put forward on behalf of revisionist was that they never knew that the drums contained illicit liquor. Report of the Excise Inspector discloses that the drum contained rectified spirit which was not an excisable article; this contention was repelled by Collector, Kanpur, who recorded the confiscation order on 20 -8 -1979. This order was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 141/M of 1979 giving rise to this revision.
(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for parties and perused the record. The main contention put forward on behalf of revisionist before me was that the order of confiscation was illegal. In this connection reliance was placed upon Sec. 72, Sub -clause (5) of Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910 as below: (5) (a). No order of confiscation under this Sec. shall be made unless the owner thereof or the person from whom it is seized is given - - (i) a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on which such confiscation is proposed ; (ii) an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice, and (iii) a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the manner.;