STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAJNIKANT MAGANBHAI RAIYANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By all these revision applications filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants -State Authorities have challenged the orders passed by learned Presiding Officer and Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 8, Rajkot, by which, learned Sessions Court has modified the order of Collector and thereby reduced the penalty of confiscation of the goods.

(2.) As the issue involved in these applications is common, all these applications are being taken up for hearing together. However, facts of Criminal Revision Application No. 351 of 2009 are recorded for the sake of convenience.

(3.) The factual matrix of the present case is that the respondent is dealing in sale and purchase of edible oil. Shop of the respondent was inspected by team of District Supply Officer, Rajkot. During the course of inspection, it was revealed that the respondent has committed violation of Gujarat Essential Articles Dealers (Regulation) Order, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'Order of 1977' for the sake of brevity and convenience). Initially stock of edible oil amounting to Rs. 4,49,615/ - was seized by the District Supply Officer, Rajkot, after preparing the Panchnama. Statement of the owner and occupier of the shop was also recorded. It is alleged that in the said statement, the respondent has admitted the irregularities. Thereafter, the District Supply Officer informed the District Collector, Rajkot, about the irregularities committed by the respondent and after verifying the record, the Collector issued the show cause notice on 02.03.2006 to the respondent. In the said show cause notice, the Collector has pointed out about the irregularities committed by the respondent and about breach of provision of Order of 1977. The respondent was asked to show cause why the stock for an amount of Rs. 4,49,615/ - should not be confiscated. The respondent submitted his reply to the said show cause notice on 16.03.2006 and pointed out that Order of 1977 is not applicable to edible oil and therefore the show cause notice issued by the Collector is without jurisdiction. He has also denied the allegations levelled against him in the show cause notice. The Collector on the basis of the material placed on record, passed an order on 17.05.2006 and thereby held that respondent has committed the alleged irregularities and therefore, while exercising powers under Sec. 6A of Essential Commodities Act of 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity) confiscated the goods in question amounting to Rs. 4,49,615/ -. Respondent challenged the said order by filing Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2006 before the learned Sessions Court, Rajkot, and by an impugned order dated 07.03.2009, the appeal preferred by the present respondent was partly allowed and the Sessions Court has reduced the penalty imposed by the Collector and thereby, ordered confiscation of 25% of goods seized by the authority. State has therefore challenged the said order by preferring this Revision Application to the extent the penalty has been reduced by the Sessions Court. It has to be noted at this stage that respondent has not challenged order passed by the Sessions Court by preferring Revision Application and thereby accepted the findings given by the Sessions Court.