Smt. Sunita Khandelwal vs The State Olf Madhyha Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
1 MCRC-13874-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 13874 of 2026
SMT. SUNITA KHANDELWAL
Versus
THE STATE OLF MADHYHA PRADESH
Appearance:

Shri Manoj Saxena - Advocate for the petitioner [P-1].
Shri Romil Verma appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].
Heard On:19.08.2026
Delivered On:02.09.2026
ORDER
1. Present petition under section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is filed for
quashing of FIR registered at Crime no.631/2023 dated 23/09/2023 at
Police Station – MIG Colony, District – Indore for the offence
punishable under section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915.
2. The exposition of facts giving rise to present petition is as
under :
A ) On a secret information, a Skoda Car bearing
Registration No.MP-09-WF-9721 was intercepted at 9:30PM
on 22.09.2023 near Singapur Busniess Park, LIG Crossing,
Indore within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station MIG,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
2 MCRC-13874-2026
Indore.

B) One Brijkishore @ Banti was driving the vehicle and
search of the car resulted into seizure of 93.390 bulk liters of
foreign liquor containing in 283 bottles each with 330ML
capacity.
C) Brijkishore @ Banti disclosed that the vehicle belongs
to Shubh Laxmi ferrum Pvt. Ltd company and one of the
Directors of the company is present Petitioner Sunita
Khandelwal since 27.04.2011 and the seized liquor was being
transported from house of the present petitioner to seed center
at the instructions of petitioner.
D) The petitioner was asked to explain the authority
regarding transportation of the aforesaid seized liquor and the
present petitioner provided the transport Permit
No.T/Shop/Bar/2023-24/127658 dated 22.09.2023 issued to
Ironsky Productions Pvt. Ltd, Indore holding FL-II to transport
foreign liquor from retail shop of one Sangeeta Thakur,
Shailendra Thakur and Virendra Thakur holder of FL-1 of
District Indore to Ironsky Productions Pvt. Ltd. at 04, first
floor, Malav Parishar, Choti Khajrani, Indore valid up to
5:03PM of 22.09.2023 to be used to transport foreign liquor
mentioned in the permit through Vehicle MP-09-PU-9021
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
3 MCRC-13874-2026
issued by Assistant Excise Commissioner, Indore dated

22.09.2023.
E ) Police Station MIG, Indore inquired through Letter
No.4528-A dated 07.12.2023 regarding the authority to
transport the liquor and vide letter No.Excise/F-2/2023/6639
dated 11.12.2023 office of Assistant Excise Commissioner,
Indore intimated that no permit has been issued to transport the
liquor through vehicle registration No.MP-09-WF-9721 on
22.09.2023 and seed center situated at Malav Parishar, Indore
is not registered in the office so, no permit can be issued to
Malav Parishar, Indore and the seized liquor does not bear the
Batch Number so the seized liquor cannot be authenticated. It
was also intimated by the Assistant Excise Commissioner,
Indore that the authorized person for Ironsky Productions Pvt.
Ltd. is Shri Sanket Khandelwal and Vehicle No.MP-09-WF-
9721 does not tally with the particulars of Transport Permit
no.T/Shop/Bar/2023-24/127658.
F) The retail shop owner Sangeeta Thakur has also
provided the information that the seized liquor was not
supplied to Brijkishore @ Banti on 22.09.2023.
G) Completing the formalities, final report-cum-charge
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
4 MCRC-13874-2026
sheet under Section 173 of Cr.P.C., 1973 was submitted

against Brijkishore @ Banti and present petitioner Sunita
Khandelwal under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915.
3. The FIR is assailed in the petition filed by petitioner on
following grounds :
i) The applicant is lady about 58 years and a national
snooker player and a businesswoman and was falsely
implicated in the crime;
ii) The offence registered against the present
applicant is compoundable and triable by Judicial
Magistrate First Class.
iii) Nothing was seized from the possession of the
present applicant he was implicated only on the basis
of 27 memo evidence at and on the ownership of the
vehicle and Police has complete the investigation and
charge sheet was filed.
iv) the liquor sized from vehicle is duty paid liquor
and if was duly brought from the liquor shop and
even a permit was also seized by the police from the
vehicle and the applicant is having no criminal
records.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
5 MCRC-13874-2026
4. It is requested that the FIR registered at Crime no.631/2023

dated 23/09/2023 at Police Station – MIG Colony, District – Indore for
the offence punishable under section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915 be
quashed with all consequential proceedings.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in addition to the grounds
contended that the alleged offence falls within the purview to breach of
condition of license, therefore, in view of the provision of section 61 of
M.P. Excise Act, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence
punishable under section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act in absence of any
complaint or report of the Collector or authorized District Excise Officer.
The FIR against the petitioner deserves to be quashed.
6. Per-contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the petition
and contended that the investigation is underway. The liquor was
allegedly transported without any valid permit for selling in local areas,
therefore, it is not a case of breach of condition of licence. The petition is
meritless and deserves to be dismissed.
7. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
records.
8. The Supreme Court in case of State of Haryana vs. Ch. Bhajan
Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 after an elaborate consideration of the
law and after referring to various earlier decisions, observed in para 108
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
6 MCRC-13874-2026
as under:-

''108. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of
the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this
Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power
under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which
we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of
cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to
prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined
and sufficiently channelized and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to
give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be
exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the
complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their
entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against
the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if
any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying
an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)of the Code except
under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2)of the
Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the
evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of
any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence
but constitute only a noncognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a
police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section
155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and
inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach
a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the
accused.
(6)Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the
Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to
the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a
specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
7 MCRC-13874-2026
Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or
where the proceeding is maliciously Instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private
and personal grudge.''

9. In the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Vs State of
Maharashtra reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 315 (Three Judge Bench),
the Supreme Court reiterated the principles laid down in the case of
Bhajanlal (supra) and held that while the Courts ought to be cautious in
exercising powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C ( section 528 of the
BNSS,2023), they do have the power to quash the proceedings. The test
is whether or not, the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a
cognizable offence. The Court should not enter into merits of the
allegations or trench upon the power of Investigating Agency to
investigate into the allegations involving commission of a cognizable
offence.
10. Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 2019 provides as under :
34 Penalty for unlawful manufacture, transport, possession, sale etc.—
(1) Whoever, in contravention of any provision of this Act, or of any rule,
notification or order made or issued thereunder, or of any condition of a
licence, permit or pass granted under this Act,—
(a) manufactures, transports, imports, exports. colle cts of possesses any
intoxicant;
(b) save in the cases provided for in Section 38, sell any intoxicant; of
(c) cultivates bhang; or
(d) taps any toddy production tree/or draws toddy therefrom; or
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
8 MCRC-13874-2026
(e) constructs, or works any distillery brewery or vintn ery; or

(f) uses, keeps or has in his possession any material, still utensil, implement or
apparatus, whatsoever for the purpose of manufacturing any intoxicant other
than toddy; or
(g) removes any intoxicant from any distillery, brewery, vintnery or warehouse
licensed, established or contained, under this Act;
(h) Bottles any liquor; shall subject to the provisions of sub -section (2), be
punishable for every such offence with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to one year and fine which shall not be less than five hundred rupees but
which may extend to five thousand rupees: Provided that when any person is
convicted under this Section of any offence for a second or subsequent time he
shall be punishable for every such offence with imprisonment for a term which
shall not be less than two months 26, but which may extend to twenty four
months and fine which shall not be less than two thousand rupees but which
may extend to ten thousand rupees. .
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub -section (1), if a person is
convicted for an offence covered by clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1)
and the quantity of the intoxicant being liquor found at the time or in the
course of detection of the offence exceeds fifty bulk liter, he shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year
hut which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than
twenty five thousand rupees but may extend to one lac rupees :
Provided that when any person is convicted under this section for an offence
for second or subsequent time, he shall be punishable for every such offence
with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which
may extend to five years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty
thousand rupees but may extend to two lac rupee
11. Section 39 of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 provides as under :
39. Penalty for misconduct by licensees, etc. — A holder of a licence, permit
or pass granted under this Act or any person in the employ of such holder and
acting on his behalf, who intentionally —
(a) fails to produce such licence, permit or pass on the demand of any Excise
officer or of any other officer duly empowered to make such demand; or
(b) save in a case provided for by Section 34, contravenes any rule made under
Section 62; or
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
9 MCRC-13874-2026
(c) does any act in breach of any of the conditions of the licence, permit or pass
not otherwise provided for in this Act, shall be punishable in case (a) with fine
which may extend to four hundred rupees, and in case (b) or (c) with fine
which may ext end to ten thousand rupees.

12. Section 61 of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 provides as under :
61. Limitation of prosecutions. — (1) No Court shall take cognizance of an
offence punishable —
(a) under Section 34 for contravention of any condition of a licence of permit
or pass granted under this Act, Section 37, Section 38, Section 38 -A, Section
39, except on a complaint or report of the Collector or an Excise Officer not
below the rank of District Excise officer as may be authorised by the Collector
in this behalf;
(b) under any other section of this Act other than Section 49 except on the
complaint or report of an Excise Officer or Police Officer.
(2) Except with the special sanction of the State Government, no Judicial
Magistrate shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act, or
any rule or order thereunder, unless the prosecution is instituted within six
months from the date on which the offence is alleged to have been committed.
13. The case on hand is being examined considering the
aforestated provisions and prepositions of law.
14. The case diary reveals that when information was sought
from the office of Assistant Excise Commissioner, Indore regarding
seized liquor then it was reported that the liquor does not tally as per the
Transport Permit no.T/Shop/Bar/2023-24/127658. Apart from that,
timings of the transportation is different from the timings mentioned in
the transport permit . The learned counsel for the petitioner was at loss to
show any condition of the license permitting the licensee to transport the
liquor without permit or transit pass. Thus, the liquor was prima facie
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
10 MCRC-13874-2026
illegally transported without any valid transit pass or permit. It is not case

of breach of condition of license, therefore, Section 39 or Section 61 of
the M.P. Excise Act would not apply to the case on hand.
15. This Court while considering application for quashing of FIR
and consequential proceedings thereof, can neither examine the merits of
evidence, nor indulge into scrutiny of veracity and credibility of the
allegation on consideration of extraneous factors and circumstances. This
Court cannot indulge into appreciation of material collected during
investigation on its merits. The allegations in the FIR and the allegation
reflected by material collected during investigation cannot be said to be
inherently improbable or absurd. At this juncture, it cannot be said that
possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal
case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and
extreme injustice would be caused to him. Therefore, no case is made out
for quashing of FIR and consequential proceedings in exercise of
inherent jurisdiction in view law laid down in the case of Bhajanlal and
Neeharika (supra).
16. Consequently, the petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023
is dismissed.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24676
11 MCRC-13874-2026
amit


Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT KUMAR
Signing time: 03-09-2026
15:49:38