( 1 ) THIS petition is directed against an order passed by the District and sessions Judge, N. K. , Karwar, under S. 6-C of the Essential commodities Act, 1955 (to be hereinafter referred to as the 'act'), as judicial authority appointed by the State Government by its notification S. O. No. 5886 dated 13-12-1966.

( 2 ) CERTAIN commodities had been seized by the police from the respondents on the ground that one or the other Food Control Orders had been violated by them. Proposals were put up to the Deputy Commissioner, north Kanara, under S. 6-A of the Act for confiscating the said commodities. The Deputy Commissioner passed an order confiscating the commodities to the Government and as against that, an appeal was preferred to the judicial authority under S. 6-C of the Act. The judicial authority set aside the order of confiscation passed by the Deputy Commissioner and, hence the State, aggrieved by the said order, has challenged the same in this petition.

( 3 ) SRI Suresh S. Joshi, the learned Counsel for the respondents, raised a preliminary objection and contended that the revision petition is not maintainable because the judicial authority is not an inferior criminal court as mentioned in Ss. 435 and 439 of the Crl. P. C He urged that the district and Sessions Judge. North Kanara Karwar. has not entertained the appeal under S. 6-C of the Act ss the Sessions Judge of the Court of session. North Kanara. but as a judicial authority appointed by the state Government under the notification mentioned above, empowering him to enterain and dispose of such appeals under S. 6-C of the Act s. 6-C (1) of the Act reads as follows:"any person aggrieved by an order of confiscation under S. 6-A may, within one month from the date of the communication to him of such order, appeal to any judicial authority appointed by the State government concerned and the judicial authority shall, after piving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard, pass such order as it may think fit, modifying or annulling the order appealed against. "

( 4 ) A plain reading of the above section makes it manifest that it is not laid down that the appeal lies to a Court of Session. The appeal is made to lie to any judicial authority appointed by the State Government concerned. The State Government has, by the abovementioned notification, in exercise of the powers conferred on it by S. 6-C of the Act, appointed the District and Sessions Judge, North Kanara, Karwar, as the judicial authority for the area comprising North Kanara District. It is to be noted that the Court of Session, North Kanara, is not appointed the judicial authority. The scheme of the Act makes it abundantly clear that ss. 6-A, 6-C and 6-D of the Act deal with confiscation of the commodities.

( 5 ) IN regard to prosecutions for violation of different Food Control Orders passed by virtue of the powers conferred on the State Governments by s. 3 of the Act, a different procedure is provided in the Act. Certain provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code are made applicable so far as they relate to trial of cases, and appeals and revisions against convictions in the said trials. In regard to the provisions of confiscation, a different procedure is provided and a different right of appeal is conferred. That part of the scheme of the Act has been kept separate and it is not provided that it has anything to do with ordinary criminal Courts. Prosecutions for the breach of the provisions of the various Food Control Orders, we made to lie in ordinary criminal Courts. S. 7 of the Act, dealing with penalties has laid down that such penalties are to be awarded by Courts. It is hence, apparent that a distinction is made in the Act itself, between a judicial authority and a Court.

( 6 ) SECTIONS 435 and 439 of the Crl. P. C. provide, as far as the High court is concerned, that it may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior criminal Court and in its discretion exercise any of the powers co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document