BADRIPRASAD Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have filed this revision petition under Sec.397 read with Sec.401 of the Cr.P.C , being aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.7.2018, passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur, in Criminal Appeal No.106/2017.

(2.) Facts giving rise to the instant petition, in short, are that the applicants are the owner and driver, respectively, of truck bearing registration No.UP91 T 2469. On 25.1.2016 50 sacks of urea fertilizer were seized from the vehicle and upon inquiry, the driver of the said vehicle could not produce any valid document for transportation of the said material. The Fertilizer Inspector and Senior Agricultural Development Officer lodged at report at P.S. Harpalpur, where Crime No.19/16, for offences punishable under Sec.3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sec.35 of the Fertilizer Control Act, 1985, was registered against the driver and owner of the said vehicle, and information to this effect sent to the Collector, Chhatarpur. The Collector, Chhatarpur, issued show cause notice to the applicant and driver of the above vehicle with regard to its confiscation. Both the driver and owner filed their reply to the show cause notice and after considering their reply, the Collector, Chhatarpur, passed an order of confiscation and auctioned the vehicle. The sale proceeds have been deposited in government account. Against the said order of Collector Chhatrapur, the applicants filed an application before JMFC, Nowgong, Distt. Chhaapur for releasing the vehicle on supurdiginama, wherein the learned JMFC passed an order for giving the said vehicle on supurdiginama to the applicant. The applicants also filed an appeal before ASJ, Chhatarpur, registered as Cri. Appeal No.106/2017, being aggrieved by the order dated 6.2.2017 passed by Collector, Chhatarpur, on the ground that the order passed by the Collector is bad in law. The learned Appellate Court, after hearing both the parties, delivered the judgment on 28.8.2018, dismissing the appeal. This order dated 28.8.2018 is impugned herein.

(3.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the Appellate Court is against the principle of natural justice. The collector has not considered the reply of show cause notice filed by the applicants. The order is perverse. It is further contended that the court of learned JMFC, has already passed an order for giving the above vehicle on supurdiginama, whereafter the Collector ordered for confiscation and later on auctioned the vehicle. The learned appellate court has not considered this fact. Prays for setting aside the order dated 28.8.2018 passed by learned ASJ, Chhatarpur, in Cri. Appeal No.106/2017.