Important Point: When the confiscation proceeding, which is independent proceeding, comes to an end, after making order by Collector and it can be challenged only as provided in the Act, it was not open to the appellate authority also to allow the owner to take the vehicle after furnishing surety.

T.V. NALAWADE, J.

1. Rule, rule made returnable forthwith. Heard both sides by consent for final disposal.

2. After advancing arguments on merits of the matter in length by the learned counsel for the petitioner, when this Court expressed that the Court will not be granting any relief to the petitioner, transporter but the Court is thinking to see that proper orders are made under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and for that purpose, the decisions of the Collector and the Appellate Authority are corrected, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would withdraw the proceeding. This Court can exercise powers not only under the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India but also under the provision of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In the present matter in view of the provisions of the Act and the Orders issued under the Act by the Central Government this Court is deciding the matter on merits and not allowing the petitioner to withdraw the proceeding.

3. The petitioner is a transporter and is owner of one truck-tanker bearing No. MH-18-AA-4548. The petitioner transports H.S.D. (High Speed Diesel) after lifting it from Manmad Depot of the Indian Oil Corporation. The incident in question took place on 12-4-2014. When the tanker entered the campus of Gangakhed Depot of MSRTC, State Transport Corporation, as per the procedure, the compartments of the tanker were opened by the officers of MSRTC in the presence of driver of the present petitioner. There was invoice in respect of the H.S.D. filled in the tanker and in accordance with the procedure, verification of the stock was done. The tanker was expected to contain 12000 liters of H.S.D. Then, as per challan the density of H.S.D. from the four compartments of the tanker was tested in the presence of the driver. There were four compartments in the tanker and the density of the diesel from the compartment nos. 2, 3 and 4 was found to be correct but the density of the diesel from compartment no. 1 did not tally with the expected density shown in the challan. Further, when some diesel was taken out for examination it appeared to the officer that it had blue colour, colour of kerosene which is meant for Public Distribution System. This incident was then reported to the Tahsildar, a Gazetted Officer, of Gangakhed.

4. The Gazetted Officer visited the S.T. Depot and collected samples from this compartment. There was around 3000 liters of diesel in this compartment and it was found to be adulterated by using kerosene. Value of H.S.D. per liter is four times more than the value of such kerosene sold in Public Distribution System. The officer of the S.T. Depot gave report on the same day to the Gangakhed Police and crime came to be registered for offences punishable under sections 420, 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 7 etc. of the Act. The report of the sample is received from C.A. office and it shows that the kerosene was mixed in diesel. It is specifically mentioned in the report that the kerosene found in the diesel is meant for Public Distribution System (P.D.S.).

5. During investigation, police recorded statements of the persons from the S.T. Depot Gangakhed and the persons from Manmad Depot of Indian Oil Corporation. It appears that some correspondence was made with the Indian Oil Corporation to supply the video recording of the incident of filling diesel in this tanker. But the police papers produced before this Court do not show that such video footage was supplied by the Oil Corporation.

6. Statements of the employees of the Indian Oil Corporation are to the effect that as per procedure, H.S.D. was filled in the tanker and it was locked and the relevant record like challan etc. was handed over to the driver. It appears that during investigation the driver contended that he had mixed the kerosene and the kerosene was taken by him from the campus of t