M. Gopalu, 21 Others, vs The State Rep By Pp Hyd., Another,
2022 Latest Caselaw 862 AP

        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

                  CRL.R.C.NO.1961 OF 2006

ORDER:-


      Aggrieved by the order, dated 15-04-2022, passed under

Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act,1955 ( for short

"the Act") by the Joint Collector & Additional District Magistrate,

Ananatapur in Rc.No.K3/7725/2001, confiscating the entire

seized stocks and also imposing a fine of Rs.5,000/- on the

owner of the Lorry No.AP 21 V 2777, the petitioners filed

Criminal Appeal bearing No.69 of 2002 under Section 6-C of the

Act before the learned Sessions Judge, Anantapur. The learned

Sessions Judge, Anatapur, by order, dated 07-09-2006 while

partly allowing the Appeal, modified the confiscation amount to

50% imposed by the Joint Collector. It is the said order which is

impugned in this Criminal Revision Case.


2.    Heard Sri Kuncheam Maheswara Rao, learned counsel for

the petitioners and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special

Assistant Public Prosecutor.


3.    The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

      (i) A show cause notice was issued under Section 6-B of

the Act on the allegation that the rice meant for 'food for work"

programme has been diverted into black market by one S.Nagi

Reddy, a fair price shop dealer of Utakallu of Gutti Mandal.

Subsequently, a claim petition was filed by the petitioners 1 to

21 stating that the rice belonging to them as they are labourers.

The Joint Collector being the primary authority found that all the
                                  2




petitioners sold the said rice to the fair price shop dealer who

was transporting the said rice to the black market thorough a

Lorry owned by the petitioner No.22. As such, after going

through the entire material on record, the Joint Collector ordered

100% confiscation.

     (ii) Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein filed an

Appeal viz., Crl.A.No.69 of 2002 before the learned Sessions

Judge,    Ananatapur.   The   learned    Sessions    Judge   after   an

elaborate discussion and by taking a lenient view reduced the

confiscation amount to 50% by judgment, dated 07-09-2006.


3.   As seen from the material placed on record, it is an

admitted fact that the seized rice was meant for "food for work'

programme. It is further seen from the material placed on record

that the entire rice i.e., 150 bags (75 quintals) was sold at a

higher price to a fair price shop dealer who was shown as

1st respondent before the Joint Collector. At that stage, it seems

that the fair price shop dealer set up these petitioners with a

false claim. As such, no credence can be given to the said

belated version of the petitioners. As already stated above, the

learned Sessions Judge took a lenient in reducing the

confiscation to 50%. Therefore, there are no merits to interfere

with the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and

Criminal Revision Case is liable to be dismissed as devoid of any

merit.

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed

confirming the judgment, dated 07-09-2006 passed by the

Sessions Judge, Anatapur in Crl.A.No.69 of 2002.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed

in consequence.

__________________ K.SURESH REDDY,J 16-02-2022.

TSNR