Javvaji Velugondaiah vs Pabbisetty Lakshmi Kumari
2022 Latest Caselaw 375 AP

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                         &
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                       WRIT APPEAL No. 78 of 2022

                          (Proceedings through virtual mode)

Javvaji Velugondaiah
S/o. J. Satyanarayana,
Aged 45 years,
R/o. D.No.9/114, Kasturba Street,
Markapuram Village & Mandal,
Prakasam District.                                    .. Appellant

          Versus

Pabbisetty Lakshmi Kumari
W/o. Hanumantha Rao,
Aged 42 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. 10th ward, Vijayalakshmi Street,
Markapur Town, Prakasam District
and others.                                           ..Respondents

Counsel for the appellant                     : Mr. V.R. Machavaram

Counsel for respondent No.1                   : Ms. Nimmagadda Revathi

Counsel for respondents No.2 to 4             : Ms. V. Sujatha, G.P. for
                                                Civil Supplies

Counsel for respondent No.5                   : Mr. V. Maheshwar Reddy,
                                                G.P. for Home.


                             JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Dt: 27.01.2022 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

This writ appeal would call in question the order dated

20.05.2021 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No.10301 of

2021 disposing of the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 herein,

at the admission stage, directing the District Collector (Civil Supplies

Wing), Prakasam District at Ongole, respondent No.2 therein, to deal

with the application dated 24.04.2021 submitted by the writ petitioner

for release of the stock 48,370 kgs contained in 950 bags of common

rice seized in Cr.No.73 of 2021 of Markapur Rural Police Station,

Prakasam District.

2. The appellant herein was not a party to the writ proceedings. He

has been permitted to prefer the writ appeal on the ground, as claimed

by him, that the subject rice has been seized from the premises

belonging to him and for which Cr.No.73 of 2021 has been registered at

Markapur Rural Police Station, Prakasam District for the offences

punishable under Section 420 of IPC and Section 7 of Essential

Commodities Act.

3. The material papers available before us do not indicate that the

concerned Collector has initiated any proceedings under Section 6A of

Essential Commodities Act. The rice has not been seized by the Deputy

Tahsildar, Civil Supplies Department, but has been seized by Markapur

Rural Police in Cr.No.73 of 2021, for the offences punishable under

Section 420 of IPC and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act. Thus,

neither of the parties can invoke the jurisdiction of the Collector to

entertain any application for release of the subject rice towards interim

custody.

4. Whether or not the writ petitioner or the writ appellant would be

entitled in law to seek interim custody of the seized rice is a question to

be determined by the jurisdictional criminal court before which the

seized commodity would be produced in proceedings in respect of

Cr.No.73 of 2021. This Court cannot make an enquiry or record any

prima-facie observation as to the rival claims regarding the entitlement

of the parties for interim custody of the subject rice. It can only be

established in the proceedings under Section 457 Cr.P.C., before the

jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and since the learned

counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the writ

petitioner have agreed to avail the remedy before the jurisdictional

Judicial Magistrate, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ appeal

with an observation that it will remain open for the writ appellant and

the writ petitioner, the rival claimants, to move necessary application

before the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate for seeking interim custody

of the seized rice. If any such application is made, the jurisdictional

Judicial Magistrate shall enquire into the issue for prima-facie

satisfaction to exercise the power in favour of the rival parties for

directing release of the seized rice towards interim custody.

6. In view of the observation made, the order passed by the learned

single Judge is set-aside. It is made clear that any observation made by

this Court shall not affect the proceedings before the jurisdictional

Judicial Magistrate.

7. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Pending

miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J

GM

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT APPEAL No. 78 of 2022 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Dt: 27.01.2022

GM