Dismissed¶25

Nav Ratan Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Dec 2025CR. REV./671/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

E.C. Act confiscation; release of auction proceeds after acquittal; Section 6(a) and 6(c) of the E.C. Act; application before District Magistrate; acquittal by Special Judge E.C. Act for want of prosecution evidence; no State appeal; criminal revision dismissed as infructuous; seized articles rice and wheat; accused purchased auctioned articles for Rs. 1,59,295; Bhojpur at Ara; PS Case No. 86 of 2008; direction to dispose release application within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous; Petitioner at liberty to move an appropriate application before the learned District Magistrate for release of the auction proceeds of the seized articles, and the concerned District Magistrate directed to dispose of such application within one month of filing. ¶25

Nav Ratan Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Sustainability of the confiscation of the Petitioner's seized articles under the E.C. Act and of the appellate order upholding it — the original grievance raised by this revision, which the court did not decide as the petition was dismissed as infructuous. +2 more

¶14

Court's answer

In view of the Petitioner's acquittal, the criminal revision petition challenging confirmation of the confiscation had become infructuous and was dismissed as such, with liberty to pursue the statutory remedy before the District Magistrate.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

Under Section 6(a) and 6(c) of the E.C. Act, on acquittal the auction proceeds of confiscated articles are required to be paid back to the accused from whom the articles were seized.

¶24

Key takeaways

The acquitted person is required to file an application before the District Magistrate himself for release of the auction proceeds of the confiscated articles.ratio¶24
The concerned District Magistrate is directed to dispose of the Petitioner's application for release of the auction amount within one month of its filing.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Jitendra Kumar, J.), Criminal Revision No. 671 of 2019, decided 09-12-2025: The revision challenged the order dated 28.03.2019 of the Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Bhojpur at Ara dismissing Miscellaneous Appeal No. 23 of 2009 and upholding the District Magistrate's confiscation, under the E.C. Act, of the Petitioner's seized articles (rice and wheat). The Petitioner had meanwhile been acquitted by the Special Judge, E.C. Act by order dated 06.02.2018 for want of prosecution evidence, with no appeal by the State after the statutory period. Held: under Section 6(a) and 6(c) of the E.C. Act, on acquittal the auction proceeds are required to be paid back to the accused from whom the articles were seized, and the Petitioner must apply before the District Magistrate himself for their release (the Petitioner having himself bought the auctioned articles for Rs. 1,59,295/-). Petition dismissed as infructuous with liberty to apply; District Magistrate directed to dispose of the application within one month of filing.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.671 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2008 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Nav Ratan Singh, S/o Chandrama Singh, R/o Malthar, P.S.- Udwant Nagar, District- Bhojpur, Ara.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

13 09-12-2025

¶13

The present Criminal Revision petition has been preferred by the Petitioner against the impugned order dated 28.03.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Bhojpur at Ara in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 23 of 2009.

¶14

In the said appeal, the Petitioner herein had challenged the confiscation of the seized articles under the E.C. Act by learned District Magistrate.

¶15

However, vide impugned order dated 28.03.2019, learned Additional Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal, upholding the confiscation order of the District Magistrate. However, at this stage, learned counsel for the Petitioner informs that the Petitioner has been acquitted by the order dated 06.02.2018 by Special Judge E.C. Act for want of any

¶16

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.671 of 2019(13) dt.09-12-2025 2/3

¶17

prosecution evidence on record, and hence, he is claiming the proceeds of auction after confiscation. As per further statement, the seized articles were rice and wheat. During auction, the Petitioner himself has purchased the auctioned articles for an amount of Rs. 1,59, 295/-

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned APP for the State.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been acquitted by the Special Judge and no appeal has been filed by the State till date even after lapse of the statutory period of filing appeal.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner also agrees that this petition has become infructuous at this stage and he may be given liberty to move before the District Magistrate for release of the auction proceeds.

¶21

Learned APP for the State submits that the present petition has become infructuous in view of acquittal of the Petitioner and new cause of action to move application before learned District Magistrate for release of the auction proceeds arose.

¶22

I considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material on record. In the light of Sections 6(a) and

¶23

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.671 of 2019(13) dt.09-12-2025 3/3

¶24

6(c) of the E.C. Act, the Petitioner is required to file an application for release the auction proceeds of the confiscated articles before the District Magistrate himself because as per the provisions as provided under Section 6(a) and 6(c) of the E.C. Act, on acquittal, the auction proceeds is required to be paid back to the accused from whom the articles were seized.

¶25

Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as infructuous and the Petitioner is at liberty to move an appropriate application before learned District Magistrate for release of the auction amount of articles which were seized from him. If such application is filed by the petitioner, concerned District Magistrate is directed to dispose of the application within one month of the filing of the application.

¶26

(Jitendra Kumar, J.)

¶27

Chandan/-

¶28

U T

Nav Ratan Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nav Ratan Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar Through Home Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna, Bihar and Anr.

Umashankar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Government O

Vinod Yadav @ Binod Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretory-cum-commissioner, Mines And Geology Department

Ravindra Kumar Prasad and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Godawari Devi @ Godabri Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Puja Devi @ Puja Kumari Vs The State of Bihar