The High Court in criminal revision reduced the confiscation of seized rice stock to 20% from 50% ordered by the Sessions Judge in a case of violation of Essential Commodities Act. The remainder of the impugned order holds good.
Confiscation of 20% of seized rice stocks instead of 50% as ordered by the Sessions Judge.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2276 OF 2010
DATED 7th NOVEMBER, 2012.
BETWEEN :
S.Srinivasa Rao
.. Petitioner-appellant
and
The Joint Collector & another
..Respondents
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2276 OF 2010
ORDER:
Petitioner filed this Criminal Revision Case by invoking the provision under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code being aggrieved by the judgment dated 08.07.2010 rendered in Criminal Appeal No.164 of 2010 by the learned Sessions Judge, Guntur.
Heard.
Brief facts of the case are that when R.2 herein inspected the rice mill premises of the petitioner herein on 23.02.2010 at about 1.00 noon, a short fall of 11.25 Qtls in rice stocks was found when verified with books of account and further it is also alleged that the petitioner herein was indulged in clandestine business by purchasing PDS rice stocks and mixing the same into other variety rice stocks and selling the same to needy persons at higher rates. Thus, a case was registered against the petitioner and other two accused under Section 6-A of Essential Commodities Act.
After due enquiry, the Joint Collector passed an order dated 17.03.2010 in E.C. Act Case No.46/2010-S7 confiscating the entire seized stock i.e.296.25 Qtls. of rice stocks in favour of Government
besides imposing a fine of Rs.5,000/- on second respondent therein. In appeal by the petitioner herein, the learned Sessions Judge by impugned order modified the confiscation order to 50% of the seized stock from 100%. Challenging the same, present has been preferred.
Heard.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also having heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that without going into merits of the case, the quantity of stocks ordered to be confiscated can be reduced to 20% from 50%.
Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of ordering confiscation of 20% of stocks instead of 50% as ordered by the Appellate Judge. Remaining portion of the impugned judgment holds good.
Miscellaneous petitions filed in this revision, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
Date : 07.11.2012 sur
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the quantum of confiscation under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act can be reduced below the Sessions Judge's order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Srinivasa Rao
The Joint Collector
another
Raja Elango
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
