The Collector, under the Central Act, has the power to release the vehicle, animal, vessel etc. in case of the option exercised by the owner thereof to pay the market price at the date of seizure. There is no such corresponding provision in the State Act. Otherwise, the Collector does not have the power to release the vehicle, vessel or other conveyance till the conclusion of the criminal prosecution and if no prosecution is launched, until when the Collector decides not to confiscate the vehicle, and if the order of confiscation is passed, then only on the annulment of the aforesaid order of confiscation by the Appellate Authority.

Ashutosh Kumar, J.

A Division Bench of this Court, while deciding the correctness of the order of confiscation under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in short the E.C. Act, 1955) of food-grains and vehicles on which the same was being carried as well as the Appellate order and the order passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 2151 of 2015 (Baleshwar Roy Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) upholding the correctness of the aforesaid two orders, viz., the confiscation order as well as the appellate order, referred the matter to the Full Bench and framed the following terms of reference to be decided and answered by it:

(A.) Whether the Collector, who has seized any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying essential commodity, has the jurisdiction to release such animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance, and if so, on what conditions?

(B.) Whether the separation of judicial and executive functions will empower the Collector to confiscate the animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance without trial as the deprivation of a property can be ordered by a Court only after trial of the criminal case?

(C.) Whether the provisions of Section 6-D of the Act, so as to inflict any other punishment after confiscation, would stand the legal scrutiny on the touchstone of double jeopardy?

(D.) Whether the power of confiscation of the goods and the vehicle vesting with the Collector as an Executive Authority can be said to be legal in view of the principle of separation of executive and judicial power and/or that the power of confiscation of the goods and the vehicle can be exercised only by the Court.

2. While formulating the aforesaid terms of reference for the Full Bench, the Division Bench took note of the discordant notes in (i) Bishwanath Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.; 1978 (26) BLJR 717, (ii) Jhabarmal Mukim Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.; 1984 (1) PLJR (HC) 568; (iii) Shambhu Dayal Agarwala Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.; (1990) 3 SCC 549; and a Division Bench decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court reported in (1999) 1 RCR (Cri) 1 (DB); Rajesh Kumar Vs. State of Haryana with respect to the provisions contained in Section 6-A, B, C, D and E as well as Section 7 of the E.C. Act, 1955.

3. In order to answer the aforesaid questions, it would be first necessary to refer to the aforesaid relevant provisions, viz., Sections 6-A, B, C, D and E as well as Section 7 of the E.C. Act, 1955 (Central Act as well as the State Act).

4. The E.C. Act, 1955 was enacted by the Parliament to provide, in the interests of the general public, for the control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in, certain commodities.

5. For the sake of completeness and ready reference, the provisions contained in the aforesaid Sections of the E.C. Act, 1955 (Central Act as well State Act) are being reproduced hereinbelow in a tabular form :-

Central Act	State Act
6-A. Confiscation of food-grains, edible oilseeds and edible oils.–(1) Where any essential commodity is seized in pursuance of an order made under Section 3 in relation thereto, a report of such seizure shall, without unreasonable delay, be made to the Collector of the district or the Presidency-town in which such essential commodity is seized and whether or not a prosecution is instituted for the contravention of such order, the Collector may, if he thinks it expedient so to do, direct the essential commodity so seized to be produced for inspection before him, and if he is satisfied that there has been a contravention of the order may order confiscation of-   (a) the essential commodity so seized;   (b) any package, covering or receptacle in which such essential commodity is found; and   (c) any animal, vehic