Bombay High Court
Jagoji Ramaji Dhoble vs Collector Nagpur District, ... on 2 February, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
0202 wp 62 of 2022.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.62/2022
Shri Jagoji Ramaji Dhoble
...Versus...
Collector, Nagpur District, Collector Office, Near Akashwani Chowk, Civil Lines,
Nagpur and another
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
Shri Arjun Raoka (Jain), Advocate for petitioner
Shri S.M. Ghodeswar, APP for respondents
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 02/02/2022
1. Hearing was conducted through Video
Conferencing and the learned Counsel agreed that the audio
and visual quality was proper.
2. This petition seeks modification of the order
dated 20/12/2021, passed by the respondent no.1 to the
extent of Clause-3 of the operative part, in so far as it imposes
a condition of furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs.3,50,000/-
for releasing of the Bolero Pick-Up vehicle bearing
registration No.MH-40-AK-6776.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner by relying
upon the judgment dated 26/02/2021 in Mohd. Riyaz Qadir
Miya Sheikh Vs. Collector, Nagpur District, Collector Office,
Near Akashwani Chowk, Civil Lines, Nagpur and another
0202 wp 62 of 2022.odt
[Criminal Writ Petition No.136/2021], submits that in so far
as the condition of furnishing bank guarantee for the release
of the vehicle, as contained in Section 6-A (1) (c) of the
Essential Commodities Act, 1955, it has been held that the
legislative intent is not that in every case, the bank guarantee
must be for the sum of the market price of the vehicle nor is it
mandatory that the fine in lieu of confiscation must
correspond with the market price, to the contrary, the
provision gives ample discretion and the market price is the
outer limit and not the minimum threshold, considering
which, he submits that Clause-3 of the operative part be
modified by permitting the petitioner, to furnish a solvent
surety in the sum of Rs.3,50,000/- instead of bank guarantee.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
respondents has no objection, in view of the above position of
law, as rendered in Mohd. Riyaz Qadir Miya Sheikh (supra),
considering which, the present writ petition is allowed.
Condition no.3 in the impugned order dated 20/12/2021, is
modified by permitting the petitioner to furnish a solvent
surety in the sum of Rs.3,50,000/-, in lieu of bank guarantee
of the said amount, as contained in the said order, for the
purpose of release of the vehicle.
Digitally signed bySHAILENDRA
SUKHADEORAO WADKAR
Signing Date:03.02.2022 11:31 (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Wadkar
