Sunday, 07, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Md. Mannan Ali vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 38 Gua

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 38 Gua
Judgement Date : 3 January, 2023

Gauhati High Court
Md. Mannan Ali vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 3 January, 2023
                                                             Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010249892022




                        THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/7904/2022

         MD. MANNAN ALI
         PROPRIETOR OF M/S- MANNAN SEED HOUSE @ MANAN SEED FARM,
         S/O- LATE HANIF ALI,
         R/O- VILLAGE RANGESWARI PAM,
         P.S- NAGARBERA, PIN-781127,
         DIST- KAMRUP, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
         OF ASSAM, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

         2:THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE

          ASSAM
          KHANAPARA
          GUWAHATI-22
          ASSAM

         3:THE DISTRICT AGRICULTURE OFFICER
          KAMRUP
         ASSAM
          ULUBARI
          GUWAHATI-781007

         4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
          KAMRUP
         ASSAM
         AMINGAON
          GUWAHATI-31
                                                                          Page No.# 2/6

            5:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE
             CID P.S. ASSAM
             GUWAHATI AT ULUBARI. PIN- 78100

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR H R A CHOUDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AGRI. DEPARTMENT




                                   BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

                                        ORDER

03.01.2023

Heard Mr. Z. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. M. Barman, learned counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5 and Mr. B. Choudhury, learned standing counsel for the Agriculture Department appearing for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3.

2. In view of the nature of grievance raised in the present writ petition, let a notice of motion returnable on 23.01.2023 be issued.

3. Requisite extra copies of the writ petition be served on the learned State and Departmental counsel in course of the day.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for interim relief, which is opposed by the learned standing counsel for the Agriculture Department.

5. The case of the petitioner is that he is having a license for retail Page No.# 3/6

and wholesale trade in fertilizer and seeds and he also deals with agricultural products under the name and style of M/s. Mannan Seed House @ Mannan Seed Farm, at Nagarbera under Kamrup district. On an allegation that there was a mismatch of subsidized urea fertilizer in his establishment, the petitioner was arrested on 20.03.2022 in connection with CID P.S. case no.2/2022.

6. It is projected that on 19.03.2022, the shop and godown of the petitioner was sealed and the keys of the same were handed over to the Officer of the District Agriculture Department. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is ready and willing to part with the possession of the seized urea subject to adjudication as to whether the seized urea was stored in violation of the conditions of permit/ license.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also expressed that the petitioner would have no grievance if the seized stock of urea is distributed, subject to his claim for money. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed to allow him to operate his business from his establishment. The petitioner has also expressed his willingness to undertake not to dispose any part of the seized urea which is lying in his godown. It is also expressed that the petitioner has no objection if the District administration or the Agriculture authorities make any alternative arrangement to shift the urea seized from the petitioner to any different location.

8. The learned standing counsel for the Agriculture department has submitted that the concerned authorities have been communicating with their own officiates as well as the officers of the District Administration for making Page No.# 4/6

alternative arrangement to store urea seized from the petitioner but alternative arrangement could not be made. It is also submitted that the respondent authorities would take some time to make alternative arrangements to either store or distribute the urea fertilizer using the Public Distribution System and therefore, he submits that if the establishment of the petitioner ordered to be de-sealed, it may jeopardize the investigation as the stock of seized urea is the subject matter of an ongoing investigation.

9. Considered the fact that the seized urea is a subject matter of investigation of CID case no.2/2022. In this regard, the Court is inclined to refer to the judgment dated 24.06.2022 passed by the Court in Crl. Rev. Pet.224/2022 wherein the Court had deprecated the grant of custody of seized articles, pending investigation.

10. Therefore taking into consideration that the grievance of the petitioner that his business establishment has been sealed, the Court is inclined to order as follows:

(i) That the CID authorities who have seized the business establishment of the petitioner including shop and godown shall, within 10 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, de-seal the shop and godown of the petitioner under the name and style of M/s. Mannan Seed House @ Mannan Seed Farm.

(ii) That the personnel of the CID as well as the District Administration and the District Agriculture Officer are permitted Page No.# 5/6

to formally seize the subsidized urea stored in the godown of the petitioner and they are permitted to hand over the custody of the same to the petitioner who on receipt of such zimma shall not be permitted to deal or dispose any part of the urea kept in his custody.

(iii) The investigation agency as well as the District Administration and the Agriculture Department would be at liberty at any time to remove the seized urea during the pendency of the writ petition, without leave of the Court.

(iv) Within the time allowed, the CID shall allow the petitioner to be in the possession of the shop and godown and to operate his business, subject to other license and permits, whatever is required to operate his establishment.

(v) In case of any difficulty in implementing this order, the petitioner as well as the respondents are permitted to move this Court for modification of the order.

11. List the matter on 23.01.2023.

12. The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of the order before the CID PS, Guwahati and another certified copy be also produced before the District Agricultural Officer, Kamrup to bring the order to the notice of the said authorities.

Page No.# 6/6

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter