SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(All) 85

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.
Rajesh Kumar Yadav – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Application U/S 482 No. 15174 of 2020
Decided On : 20-01-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Ravi Ratn Kumar Sinha

An application for release of a seized vehicle under Section 451 Cr.P.C. during pendency of confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable before the Magistrate.

Headnote:

Seized Vehicle - Essential Commodities Act - 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - [6A, 6B, 6C, 6E, 451, 457 Cr.P.C.] - The court discussed the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, including confiscation of essential commodities, issue of show-cause notice before confiscation, appeal, and bar of jurisdiction in certain cases. The court highlighted the discretion and power granted to the authority concerned under the Essential Commodities Act, the saving clause under Section 5 of the Cr.P.C., and the precedence of special provisions over general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case of any conflict. The court also cited relevant case law to support the interpretation of the legal provisions and concluded that an application for release of a seized vehicle under Section 451 Cr.P.C. during pendency of confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable before the Magistrate.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought the release of his seized vehicle under Section 451 Cr.P.C. during pendency of confiscation proceedings before the court of District Magistrate, Chandauli under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. The Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the application, and the applicant filed a Criminal Misc. Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before the Court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the application for release of the seized vehicle during pendency of confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable before the Magistrate, based on the legal provisions and precedents cited.

Issues: The issue before the Court was whether an application under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for release of seized vehicle is maintainable during pendency of confiscation proceedings before the collector under Section 6A of The Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, including Section 6A, 6B, 6C, and 6E, along with the saving clause under Section 5 of the Cr.P.C., establish the statutory bar on the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to entertain the application for release of a seized vehicle during pendency of confiscation proceedings.

Final Decision: The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed as it was found to be devoid of merits and did not warrant any interference by the Court.

JUDGMENT :

Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.

1. Heard Shri Ravi Ratan Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Rajesh Kumar Yadav with a prayer to set-aside the impugned order dated 25.08.2020 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli on the release application in Case No. Nil of 2020 (Rajesh Kumar Yadav Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Crime No. 68 of 2020, under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Police Station Alinagar, District Chandauli, whereby the application for release of seized vehicle has been rejected.

3. Factual Matrix of the case is as under.

Applicant Rajesh Kumar Yadav moved an application for release of vehicle (tanker) bearing no. U.P.62 B.T.1335 alleging himself to be its registered owner. On 01.04.2020, Inspector Police Station Alinagar, District Chandauli reported that near Sareshar village Vijay Yadav r/o Domanpur, P.S. & District Bhadohi with three gallons each having capacity of 20 liters and one pipe to be used for extracting oil from the tanker, was found present and from the tanker theft of oil was attempted. All the upper lids of tanker were opened. Supply Inspector Rajeev Kumar along with his staff went to Police Station Alinagar and inspected the tanker, it was found that the tanker contained 20,000 (twenty thousand) liters diesel. Locks of all chambers were found opened, which was illegal. The tanker was registered in favour of Rajesh Kumar Yadav r/o Junwani Road, Bhilai Road, Chhattisgarh. Driver of the tanker was not present. Vijay Shankar Yadav stated that he was brother of owner of the tanker. The driver of tanker drove it from Indian Oil to Shiv Enterprises, Rae Bareli on 31.3.2020 at 3 O'clock, having 20,000 (twenty thousand) liters of diesel. He parked the tanker near Sareshar Village and went to his home. On 1.4.2020 in the morning, police saw the opened seal and made query with him, it was found that 20,000 (twenty thousand) liters diesel was being black-marketed by Vijay Shankar Yadav. As a result, tanker bearing no. U.P.62BT1335 containing 20,000 (twenty thousand) liters diesel and two empty gallons of twenty liters capacity and one other gallon filled with twenty liters diesel alongwith oil extracting pipe was seized and thereafter First Information Report under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act was lodged as Crime No. 68 of 2020, Police Station Alinagar, District Chandauli.

4. The owner of vehicle/ applicant Rajesh Kumar Yadav moved an application before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli for release of vehicle which was rejected. As a result Criminal Revision No. 21 of 2020 was preferred before the court of Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Chandauli which was allowed and order passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 6.6.2020 was set-aside. Matter was returned back to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for passing order afresh in the light of observations made by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge.

5. Again applicant moved an application before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli for release of the seized vehicle in the light of the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judged which was again rejected by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 25.8.2020 on the ground of non-maintainability of the application on account of confiscation proceedings pending before the court of District Magistrate, Chandauli under Section 6A of Essential Commodities Act. Being aggrieved with this order this Criminal Misc. Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred before this Court.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a businessman and has a tanker bearing no. UP62BT1335 for doing transportation work. On 4.1.2020 his tanker was not involved in any Essential commodities Act but the Inspector, in-charge, Alinagar for taking bribe implicated the applicant's tanker containing 20,000 (twenty thousand)

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        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

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top