Vishal Dattatray Palve vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

Original PDF →

APPLN/3586/2023HC BombayGSTCNR HCBM03039609202325 June 2025Bench: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE VIBHA KANKANWADI,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY A. DESHMUKH9 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The applicants, Vishal Palve and Ujwala Munde, sought to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them. Criminal Application No. 3586 of 2023 pertains to R.C.C. No. 115 of 2023, arising from FIR Crime No. 64 of 2022, registered on April 5, 2022, by the State Excise Department, Udgir-A, for offences under Sections 65(f), 81, 83, 86, and 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. Criminal Application No. 3589 of 2023 relates to R.C.C. No. 15 of 2023, stemming from FIR Crime No. 65 of 2022, registered on the same date and by the same authority, for similar offences. The seized items included caps, mono-cartons, labels, folders, and empty bottles. Vishal Palve was a partner in M/s. Rishikesh Liquors, which held an FL-I license. The material was allegedly stored in a godown belonging to Rishikesh Liquors, with the applicant claiming no knowledge of its contents. The applicants argued that the seized items were scrap material and that GST had been paid for them, evidenced by e-way bills and tax invoices.

Held

The Court allowed both applications and quashed the proceedings. Regarding the issue of Section 65(f), the Court found that the seized materials, consisting of caps, mono-cartons, labels, empty bottles, and folders, did not constitute material that could be used for manufacturing any intoxicant. The Court reasoned that the word 'uses' in Section 65(f) presupposes some substance in the seized material and that the Legislature did not intend it to mean 'could be used' or 'capable of using'. The Court held that at most, the seized material could have been used for storing intoxicants, which is not covered by Section 65(f). Consequently, as the main offence under Section 65(f) was not made out, the Court held that Sections 81, 83, 86, and 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act were also not attracted. The Court noted the presence of e-way bills and tax invoices, and the payment of GST, which indicated no illegality in procuring the material. The Court concluded that the mere recovery of these articles did not automatically presume their use for illicit activities, and therefore, the case was made out for quashing the FIR and proceedings. The operative direction was to quash the proceedings in R.C.C. No. 115 of 2023 and R.C.C. No. 15 of 2023 against the respective applicants.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contents of the FIR and charge-sheet disclose, even prima facie, an offence punishable under Section 65(f) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, considering the nature of the seized materials (caps, labels, empty bottles, cartons)? 2. Whether the provisions of Section 81 (attempts or abetment), Section 83 (conspiracy), Section 86 (allowing premises to be used for an offence), and Section 90 (residuary penalty) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act are attracted when no primary offence under Section 65(f) is made out? Arguments for the Applicants: The applicants contended that the seized materials were scrap and not capable of being used for manufacturing any intoxicant. They highlighted that GST had been paid for the material, supported by e-way bills and tax invoices, indicating no illegality in procurement. They argued that the mere recovery of these items did not presume their use for illicit activities. The applicants also stated they had no knowledge of what was stored in the godown. Arguments for the Revenue/State: The State opposed the applications, submitting that articles worth Rs. 24,76,869/- were seized. They argued that the material was intended for manufacturing illicit liquor or for mis-branding, necessitating a trial.

Sections Cited

Section 65(f), Section 81, Section 83, Section 86, Section 90

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

cria-3586.23+ 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3586 OF 2023 Vishal s/o Dattatray Palve, Age-32 years, Occu:Business, R/o-Vidya Nagar, Shevgaon, Taluka-Pathardi, District-Ahmednagar ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through State Excise Department, Udgir, District-Latur, 2) J.R. Pawar, Age-36 years, Occu:Service As a Constable, State Excise, Udgir-A, District-Latur. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3589 OF 2023 1) Vishal s/o Dattatray Palve, Age-32 years, Occu:Business, R/o-Vidya Nagar, Shevgaon, Taluka-Pathardi, District-Ahmednagar, 2) Ujwala W/o Nandkumar Munde, Age-37 years, Occu:Household, R/o-Shriram Colony, Datta Nagar, Shevgaon, Taluka-Pathardi, District-Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANTS VERSUS 2025:BHC-AUG:18530-DB cria-3586.23+ 2 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through State Excise Department, Udgir, District-Latur, 2) J.R. Pawar, Age-36 years, Occu:Service As a Constable, State Excise, Udgir-A, District-Latur. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. Amol Chate Advocate h/f. Mr. A.K. Tiwari Advocate for Applicants in both Applications. Mr. A.R. Kale, Additional P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in both Applications. ... CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 25th JUNE, 2025 ORDER [PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] : 1. Criminal Application No.3586 of 2023 has been filed for quashing the proceedings in R.C.C. No.115 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chakur, District-Latur, arising out of the First Information Report (for short “the FIR”) vide Crime No. 64 of 2022, registered with State Excise Department by the Office of Inspector of State Excise, Udgir-A, District Latur, on 5th April 2022, for the offence cria-3586.23+ 3 punishable under Sections 65(f), 81, 83, 86, 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. 2. Criminal Application No.3589 of 2023 has been filed for quashing the proceedings in R.C.C. No.15 of 2023, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedpur, District-Latur, arising out of the FIR vide Crime No. 65 of 2022, registered with State Excise Department by the Office of Inspector of State Excise, Udgir-A, District Latur, on 5th April 2022, for the offence punishable under Sections 65(f), 81, 83, 86, 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. 3. Since both the Applications arises out of the same matter, they are taken up together. 4. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Chate holding for learned Advocate Mr. Tiwari for the applicants and learned APP Mr. Kale for respondents. 5. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicants in both the Applications has taken us through the charge-sheet including the FIR and submits that the contents of the FIR will not disclose cria-3586.23+ 4 even prima facie offence that is committed as per the sections stated in the FIR and the charge-sheet. In both the matters, what has been seized is the material in the form of caps, mono- cartoons, labels, folders and empty bottles etc. Nobody was present wherein it can be said that anybody would have been affected due to the material. The applicant Vishal Palve was holding FL-I license in partnership at Maliwadi, Taluka-Ahmedpur. The partnership firm was M/s. Rishikesh Liquors. One Shriniwas Rayalu contacted the applicant Vishal in June 2021 and told him that he want to shift their Bio Liquor Distillery at Solapur and wants to store scrap material in the godown of Rishikesh Liquors. In December 2021 the entire liquor stock was sold. As the business was in loss from 2022-2023, the FL-I License was not renewed. The copies of E-way bill and tax invoices were provided by Shriniwas Rayalu. The premises were belonging to one Rahul Ghatol. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 65(f) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act are not at all attracted. There was no question of conspiracy. The articles were transported from Goa to Latur District and there was E-way bill and tax invoice was also there and costing of the said material was Rs.10,22,613/-. The applicant has paid the Goods and Services Tax (GST) for the same, therefore, there was no question of cria-3586.23+ 5 illegality involved in the same. The applicants Vishal Palve and Ujwala Munde are residents of Pathardi Taluka, Ahmednagar District, who were one of the partners in Rishikesh Liquors. They have no knowledge about what was stored in the godown. 6. Learned APP strongly opposes the Applications and submits that the articles worth Rs.24,76,869/- have been seized from the spot. The material was to be used then for manufacturing illicit liquor or was to be mis-branded and therefore, the trial is necessary. 7. Section 65 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act provides for penalty for illegal import etc. of intoxicant or hemp. Any person in contravention of the provisions of the Act or any rule, regulation or order made or of any license, pass, permit or authorisation granted thereunder, [for offence under subsection (f)], uses, keeps or has in his possession any materials, still utensils, implements or apparatus for the purpose of manufacturing any intoxicant (other than opium), would be made punishable, which may be extended to five years. Now, if we consider the contents of both the FIR as well as the spot panchnama, it can be seen that there was absolutely no material lying there which can be used for the purpose of manufacturing cria-3586.23+ 6 any intoxicant. What has been found is the caps of red and green colour having different brands, mono-cartoons single piece units, labels of different brands, empty cartoon folders and two types of glass bottles. Without there being any manufacturing material, it cannot be stated that the seized articles would have been used for manufacturing of any intoxicant. Even the word “uses” presupposes some substance in the material seized, because the Legislature has not intended it to be used as “could be used or capable of using”. At the most the material that has been seized could have been used in storing the intoxicant, which is not covered in Section 65(f) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. 8. Section 81 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act deals with penalty for attempts or abetment. Here the main offence is also not made out and therefore, the question of attempt or abetment cannot get attracted. Section 83 of the Act prescribes penalty of conspiracy. Here it is to be noted that in Criminal Application No.3586 of 2023 it has been stated in the FIR that the raiding party has stated that the information was received that the illicit liquor is being manufactured in the closed premises behind theater which is behind Mayuri Bar which was cria-3586.23+ 7 closed. In Criminal Application No.3589 of 2023 it has been stated in the FIR that the raiding party has stated that the information was received that the illicit liquor is being manufactured in the closed premises of Rishikesh Liquors. Two panchas and raiding party went at the respective spots. Nobody was present there and in fact they had broke open the lock and entered the premises. They could then found out the said material at that place. Now, there was no question of conspiracy and it was between whom has also not been clarified by the prosecution. 9. Section 86 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act deals with for penalty for allowing any premises to be used for purpose of committing an offence under the Act. However, As aforesaid, no offence is being transpired. Even Section 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act has been invoked, which is in fact the residuary provision, which provides penalty for offences not otherwise provided for. Basically it requires that there has to be an offence. Here, mere recovery of those articles from the spot will not be a presumption that the said material was used for any illicit activities. Further, the E-way bills are forming part of the charge- sheet. There appears to be no investigation in respect of the said cria-3586.23+ 8 E-way bills. When G.S.T. is paid for the said material, it cannot be said that there is any illegality in procuring the said material or it cannot be stated that the said material was to be used for committing any offence and therefore, the case is made out for quashing the FIR and the proceedings. Hence, we pass following order:-

(I) Both the Applications stand allowed. (II) The proceedings in R.C.C. No.115 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chakur, District-Latur, arising out of the First Information Report vide Crime No. 64 of 2022, registered with State Excise Department by the Office of Inspector of State Excise, Udgir-A, District Latur, on 5th April 2022, for the offence punishable under Sections 65(f), 81, 83, 86, 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, stands quashed and set aside as against applicant in Criminal Application No.3586 of 2023 i.e. - Vishal S/o Dattatraya Palve. (III) The proceedings in R.C.C. No.15 of 2023, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedpur, District-Latur, arising out of the First Information Report vide Crime No. 65 of cria-3586.23+ 9 2022, registered with State Excise Department by the Office of Inspector of State Excise, Udgir-A, District Latur, on 5th April 2022, for the offence punishable under Sections 65(f), 81, 83, 86, 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, stands quashed and set aside as against the applicants in Criminal Application No.3589 of 2023, i.e. - 1) Vishal s/o Dattatray Palve and 2) Ujwala W/o Nandkumar Munde.

[SANJAY A. DESHMUKH] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] JUDGE JUDGE

asb/JULY25

Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.