PAPPU YADAV @ BHOO PRAKASH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following prayers:

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

(3.) It would appear from the record that the petitioner applied for bail and after he had been enlarged on bail, he moved an application for release of his vehicle so seized by the police. The release application was allowed by the concerned Judicial Magistrate. The Collector, Hathras (respondent no. 2), however, initiated proceedings for confiscation of the car of the petitioner under Section 72 of U.P. Act No. IV of 1910 and served the petitioner with a notice as envisaged under sub-section (5)(a) of the said Section. The petitioner made representation to the respondent no. 2 under sub-section (5)(a)(ii) of the Section 72. The respondent no. 2 vide order dated 3.12.2012 rejected the representation of the petitioner and confiscated the vehicle of the petitioner and also ordered that the vehicle, so confiscated, be sold by a public auction and further to deposit the sale proceeds in government treasury.