The proviso to S. 6a of the Essential Commodities Act allows for the release of a vehicle involved in offences upon payment of a fine, instead of confiscation.

Headnote:
Essential Commodities Act - Release of Lorry - The court held that the lorry should be released to the petitioner upon furnishing security equivalent to the value of the seized essential commodities, as provided in the proviso to S. 6a of the Essential Commodities Act.
Fact of the Case:

The lorry was seized under the Essential Commodities Act, and the Joint Collector refused to release it based on its involvement in a series of offences. The writ petition filed by the owner was dismissed by the single Judge.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the lorry should be released to the petitioner based on the proviso to S. 6a of the Essential Commodities Act, which allows the owner to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation.
Issues: The main issue was the refusal to release the lorry based on its involvement in offences under the Essential Commodities Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the proviso to S. 6a of the Essential Commodities Act, which provides for the release of the vehicle upon payment of a fine not exceeding the market price of the seized essential commodities.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was allowed, and the Joint Collector was directed to release the lorry to the petitioner upon furnishing security equivalent to the value of the seized essential commodities.

( 1 ) THE lorry was seized on the ground that an offence under the Essential Commodities Act was committed. The Joint Collector refused to release the lorry when an application was made by the appellant on the ground that the vehicle is consistently involved in a series of offences. Hence the writ petition was filed by the owner. But the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the Joint Collector exercised his discretion declining to release the lorry and there is no error of law or jurisdiction. It is against this Judgment that the present writ appeal is preferred.

( 2 ) HEARD both sides. We do not think that the learned single Judge is justified in saying that the lorry cannot be released since it was involved in a number of offences. We gain support for our view from the proviso to S. 6a of the Essential Commodities Act, which reads as under :"provided that in the case of any vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used for the carriage of goods or passengers for hire the owner of such animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance shall be given an option to pay, in lieu of its confiscation, a fine not exceeding the market price at the date of seizure of the essential commodity sought to be carried by such animal. vehicle, vessel or other conveyance".

( 3 ) THIS proviso makes it abundantly clear that the Legislature in ifs wisdom felt that the vehicle need not be confiscated even if it is insoleved in a series of offences and it should be released if the owner is prepared to pay fine not exceeding the market price at the date of seizure of the essential commodities. Hence we set aside the order under appeal and direct the Joint Collector to release the lorry to the petitioner on his furnishing security equivalent to the value of the seized essential commodities to the satisfaction of the Joint Collector. In the result the writ appeal is allowed. No costs. Advocate s fee Rs. 200/ -. Appeal allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

1985 Supreme(AP) 81

Andhra Pradesh High CourtJudges : A.SEETHARAM REDDY, PUNNAIAHG.Subrahmanyam Naidu - AppellantVersusJoint Collector, Chittoor - RespondentDecided On : 02-22-85

The proviso to S. 6a of the Essential Commodities Act allows for the release of a vehicle involved in offences upon payment of a fine, instead of confiscation.

Judicial Analysis

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : A.SEETHARAM REDDY, PUNNAIAH
G.Subrahmanyam Naidu - Appellant
Versus
Joint Collector, Chittoor - Respondent
Decided On : 02-22-85