Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Defect In Served Copy Of Affidavit Not Fatal: Supreme Court Restores Election Petition Challenging Lok Sabha Poll Result, Clarifies Law On Form-25 Attestation

Excise Officer To Decide Within A Week To Release 1,500 Boxes Of Beer: RJ HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


D.D: 01 JULAY 2022

On Friday, the Rajasthan High Court ordered the District Excise Officer of Alwar to decide within a week whether or not to release 1,500 cases of Original BIRA 91 Boom premium strong beer seized by the Rajasthan Police [M/s B9 Beverages Private Limited v. State of Rajasthan & Others].

The boxes were seized by the police because they were being transported in violation of the Rajasthan Excise Act of 1950.

Single-judge Justice Mahendar Kumar Goyal ordered the District Excise Officer of Alwar to decide the petition of B9 Beverages Private Limited, the manufacturer of Bira beer, expeditiously due to the approaching expiration date of August 2022 for the confiscated beers.

On February 28, 2022, 1,500 cases of BIRA 91 beer were transported by road from Madhya Pradesh to the Bira warehouse in Gurugram, Haryana.

The Rajgarh Police in Alwar, however, seized the shipment, alleging that it was transported in violation of the Rajasthan Excise Act of 1950.

Therefore, Bira petitioned the Excise Authority and Police Department for the release of the confiscated boxes, but the request remained pending.

However, as the expiration date of the beers drew near, the present writ petition was filed with the High Court requesting a prompt decision on the Excise Officer's appeal.

Due to the utmost necessity, the Court decided the petition without sending notice to the respondents.

"Respondent No. 3 (District Excise Officer) is ordered to decide the petitioner's Section 69 (2-B) of the Act of 1950 application within one week of receiving a copy of this order. The respondent Nos. 1 (State Of Rajasthan) and 2 (Town Inspector, Alwar) are ordered to cooperate with the respondent No. 3 in order to comply with this court's order, which was issued earlier "the Judge ordered.

Rohit Tiwari, VN Dubey, and Ibrahim Kannodwal were the attorneys who represented the petitioner.

M/s B9 Beverages Private Limited

Versus

State of Rajasthan & Others

Download Judgment

[gview file="http://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/01-07-2022-Ms_B9_Beverages_Private_Limited_v__State_of_Rajasthan___Ors.pdf"]

Latest Legal News