Dismissed

Srinath and Srirenganath v. The District Revenue Office cum Additional District Magistrate

Madras HC7 Feb 2023CRL OP(MD)/1234/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking to set aside an order returning an appeal under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act. Court held no confiscation order was passed, making Section 6C appeal inapplicable. Petitioner dismissed but granted liberty to approach District Collector under Section 6B.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; liberty granted to challenge the order before the District Collector under Section 6B of the Essential Commodities Act.

Srinath and Srirenganath Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 07.02.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶7

Srinath @ Srirenganath ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The District Revenue Office cum Additional District Magistrate, Madurai,

¶10

Madurai District.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, CSCID – Madurai, Madurai District. (Crime No.207 of 2021)

¶12

3.The Joint Registrar, Co-operative Society, Madurai Zone, Madurai.

¶13

4.The Deputy Registrar, Public Distribution Scheme, Madurai. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the order dated 23.12.2022 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai in

¶15

1/6

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶18

unnumbered Crl.A.No. of 2022 dated 07.12.2022 titling Srinath @ Srirenganath Vs. The District Revenue Office cum Additional District Magistrate and three others and consequently direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai to number the petition filed under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and to dispose of the same within a time stipulated that may be fixed by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.R.Sivakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The above Criminal Original Petition is directed against the order

¶23

of return made by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai, dated 23.12.2022, returning the appeal filed under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act, challenging the order of the first respondent.

¶24

The learned Principal District Judge, by observing that Section 6C of the Act enables any person aggrieved by an order of confiscation under Section 6A of that Act to prefer appeal and that the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 30.08.2022 is not an

¶25

2/6

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶28

confiscation order and is only an interim order recommending to cancel the permission, returned the petition as to how an appeal under Section

¶29

6C of the said Act is maintainable.

¶30

As rightly pointed out by the learned Principal District Judge, in the impugned order, the first respondent has recommended to cancel the permission granted to the first accused Srinath @ Srirenganath and the relevant passage is extracted hereunder:-

¶31

“11. ,f;Fw;wj;jpy; <Lgl;l 1-Mk; vjphp =ehj; (v) =nuq;fehj; nghJ tpepNahf jpl;l nghUl;fs; jkpo;ehL Efh;nghUs; thzpg fof fpl;lq;fpapy; ,Ue;J epaha tpiyf;filfSf;F efh;T nra;ag;gLk; xg;ge;jk; ngw;w egh; vd;gJ tprhuizapy; njhpa tUfpwJ. vdNt Nkw;fz;l egUf;F toq;fg;gl;l mDkjpapid ,uj;J nra;J chpa eltbf;if Nkw;nfhs;SkhW kJiu kz;ly $l;LwT rq;fq;fspd; ,izg;gjpthsUf;F njhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ.”

¶32

As rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate

¶33

(Criminal Side), since the first respondent has not passed any confiscation order, the question of preferring an appeal under Section 6C of the Act does not arise at all.

¶34

3/6

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶37

At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶38

would submit that the petitioner may be granted liberty to approach the District Collector under Section 6B of the said Act.

¶39

Recording the above, this Criminal Original Petition stands

¶40

dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order of the first

¶41

respondent before the District Collector, if so advised.

¶42

07.02.2023

¶43

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No csm

¶44

Note 1 : Issue order copy on 08.02.2023

¶45

Note 2 : The Registry is directed to return the original papers to the petitioner.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

4/6

¶48

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶49

¶50

1.The District Revenue Office cum Additional District Magistrate, Madurai, Madurai District.

¶51

2.The Inspector of Police, CSCID – Madurai, Madurai District.

¶52

3.The Joint Registrar, Co-operative Society, Madurai Zone, Madurai.

¶53

4.The Deputy Registrar, Public Distribution Scheme, Madurai.

¶54

5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶55

5/6

¶56

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶57

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶58

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶59

csm

¶60

Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1234 of 2023

¶61

Dated: 07.02.2023

¶62

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶63

6/6

Srinath and Srirenganath v. The District Revenue Office cum Additional District Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinath and Srirenganath v. The District Revenue Office cum Additional District Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Boobalakumaran @ Bala @ Balakumaran Vs The Inspector of Police

Kannan Vs The Inspector of Police

Periyasamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Usha Nanthini Vs The Inspector of Police

J.Usharani Vs The Commissioner of Police

Mohammed Shajakhan Vs The Inspector of Police