Back
V. SRINIVAS
Sai Krupa Traders – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Assailing the judgment dated 07.04.2009 in Crl. Appeal No. 72 of 2008 on the file of the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge at Kurnool, confirming the order dated 21.12.2007 in Rc.DSO/CS1-EC-No. 7 of 2007 passed by the learned Collector & District Magistrate at Kurnool, but the quantum of confiscation of seized stock is reduced from 100% to 20%, the petitioner filed the present criminal revision case under Section 397 r/w. 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
2. The revision case was admitted on 29.07.2009.
3. The shorn of necessary facts are that:
The court affirmed that proper procedural adherence under the Essential Commodities Act is essential for confiscation, and failure to comply with licensing conditions justifies such actions.
The court held that timely compliance with licensing requirements negates grounds for confiscation, emphasizing the necessity of just legal procedures.
Confiscation orders under the Essential Commodities Act are invalid if the statutory procedure, including notice and opportunity to be heard, is not followed.
Special Acts like The Essential Commodities Act prevail over general provisions of Cr.P.C. regarding confiscation.
Confiscation orders under the Essential Commodities Act are invalid if statutory notice and inquiry requirements are not met, violating principles of natural justice.
The independent nature of proceedings for confiscation of essential commodities and the requirement of providing a notice in writing informing the owner of the grounds for proposed confiscation, as m....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
