SUDAMA SAO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the counsel for the petitioners and the State.

(2.) THE petitioners in this application has prayed for quashing of the order dated 21.9.2007 passed by the respondent no. 2 in the Confiscation Case no. 4/2006 -7 whereby 62.50 quintals of rice belonging to the petitioners has been confiscated by the respondent no. 2 on the allegation that the rice was illegally procured by the petitioners from a PDS dealer against the provisions of law.

(3.) SRI Nilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners explains that the aforesaid quantity of rice was seized from the possession of the petitioners by the police on a suspicion that it was obtained by the petitioners from one Rajendra Shaw, a PDS dealer. The informant Sub Divisional Officer had filed FIR against the petitioners and on the basis of the said report, confiscation proceeding was also initiated. Inviting attention to certain paragraphs of the impugned order, and also referring to the order of the SDO dated 19.10.2006, learned counsel submits that the same SDO has given a clean chit to the PDS dealer Rajendra Saw on the ground that there was no involvement of Rajendra Saw in the alleged offence for which the petitioners are being prosecuted.