TARA SINGH Vs. CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to this revision petition are that on the intervening night of 17/18-2-1981, Assistant Sub Inspector Gurdit Singh and Assistant Sub Inspector Ishwar Singh, who were on patrol duty, received a secret information that a truck loaded with cement was moving about in the Transport Area, Chandigarh. A rukka was sent to the police station for registration of a case under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for contravening the provisions of Chandigarh Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1972 and the police officials proceeded to Sector 26, where truck bearing No. P.U.R.-3641 was seen moving. It was stopped in front of M/s Dashmesh Transport Company. One Balbir Singh, who was driving the truck, absconded, but Sita Ram, who was in the cabin was captured. There was 53 bags of cement in the truck. After completion of the investigation, Sita Ram was charge-sheeted for an offence under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. He pleaded not guilty to the charge. During trial, his contention was that he was an employee of M/s Dashmesh Transport Company, Chandigarh. The cement belonged to one Roop Lal, and it was to be taken to his house. After detecting the truck, the police called him and falsely implicated him in the case.

(2.) THE trial Court perused the evidence heard the learned counsel for the parties and found that the case against Sita Ram was not free from doubt. Giving him benefit of doubt, he was acquitted of the charge, but an order confiscating the truck was passed by Shri O. P. Gupta, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh. It is against this order dated 11-2-1985 that Tara Singh filed the present revision petition

(3.) IT was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the truck, which was taken into possession by the police, belonged to Gurmit Singh and Bachan Singh. It was obtained on superdari by Gurmit Singh on 21-2-1981. During the pendency of the trial, Gurmit Singh and Bachan Singh sold the truck to Tara Singh petitioner and the registration book was also got transferred in his name. He was owner of the truck, but before confiscating the learned trial Court did not issue any notice to him or to Gurmit Singh etc. The truck could not be confiscated without calling upon its owners and without providing them an opportunity to be heard. In support of his contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on the case Sukhdev Raj v. The State, 1979 CLR (P and H), page 96. It was also a case under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and the truck was confiscated. It was observed :-