The main legal point established in the judgment is that confiscation under the Essential Commodities Act requires strict adherence to the provisions of the Act, and the lack of fault or knowledge on the part of the owner or driver can impact the decision to confiscate the vehicle.

N.K. Gupta, J.:-

1. The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. of the Cr.P.C. to quash the order dated 24.6.2013 passed by the Collector, Sidhi in Criminal Case No. 139/B-121/2012-13 whereby the vehicle MP-53 G.A. 1972 was directed to be confiscated. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 30.8.2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi in Criminal Appeal No. 75/2013 whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and order dated 24.6.2013 passed by the Collector, Sidhi was confirmed.

2. The facts of the case in short are that, on 2.3.2013, an inspection was made and it was found that by truck No. MP-53 G.A. 1972, 95 bags of wheat i.e. 47.50 quintal wheat was being transported. Wheat was loaded from Warehouse, Sidhi and vehicle was driven by Sitaram Kori. The driver informed that, he was directed to take the wheat from Warehouse, Sidhi to Ration Shops of Kochila and Barambaba but, no such documents were found with him to transport such wheat. The In-charge, District Supply Officer, Sidhi made a complaint to the Collector, Sidhi. After seizure of the truck and wheat thereafter, notices were issued to the petitioner as well as the Lead Manager of Co-operative Society, Jamodi. A show cause notice was also issued to the driver Sitaram Kori.

3. After hearing the parties, the Collector, Sidhi vide order dated 24.6.2013, directed to confiscate the vehicle used for the illegal transportation. The appeal filed by the petitioner before the learned Additional Sessions Judge was dismissed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Collector, Sidhi did not follow the mandatory provisions of the Essential Commodities Act and therefore, no appropriate opportunity was given to the petitioner for hearing and therefore, order should have been set aside. Reliance is placed upon the order passed by the single Bench of this Court in the case of "Hukumchand Sahu Vs. State of M.P. & others" [2006(1) M.P.H.T. 413]. If the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties are considered, then it would be apparent that the Collector gave the notice to the petitioner before passing the confiscation order and therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner was not given any opportunity of hearing. Under such circumstances, law laid in the order passed in the case of Hukumchand Sahu (supra) cannot be relied in the present case. According to the provisions of Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in short the 'E.C. Act'), it is mentioned that if any essential commodity is seized for contravention of the provisions of Section3 of the E.C. Act then not only that commodity but, the vehicle by which it was carrying may also be confiscated.

6. If the facts of the present case are considered, then it is an admitted fact that the petitioner engaged her truck with the Lead Society, so that wheat and other items of ration could be supplied from the Warehouse, Sidhi to the various Ration Shops and therefore, the vehicle was attached to Lead In-charge, Jamodi. When vehicle was attached to the Lead In-charge, Jamodi then if some wheat is loaded from Warehouse Sidhi, then it could not be loaded for sale of wheat in open market. Certainly, the warehouse in-charge was satisfied that wheat was to be supplied to Lead Manager of the concerned Cooperative Society, Jamodi and it was directed that loaded wheat be provided to particular ration shops. It is also admitted that wheat was to be taken to ration shops of Kochila and Barambaba. Initially 195 bags were loaded in the vehicle and 100 bags were unloaded at ration shop, Kochila and thereafter, when the vehicle was taken to the ration shop, Barambaba, it was seized in the way. It was the duty of in-charge, Warehouse, Sidhi to issue the relevant papers to the truck driver and not to instruct orally. The driver took the wheat to the ration shop of Kochila and ther