##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.RA/717/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026

0.8726307908211187

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY

SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 717 of 2013 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ==========================================================

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Versus VIKAS DHANRAJ CHOITHANI ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Applicant(s) No. 2 MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 25/03/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1) By way of revision application under Section 397 (section 438 of BNSS) read with Section 401 (Section 442 of BNSS) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), the applicant – State has prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 24.04.2013 passed by learned 2^nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, in Criminal Appeal No.55/2008, whereby, learned Addl. Sessions Judge has been pleased to partly allow the appeal filed by the respondent and the order of the Collector, Bhavnagar, dated 03.07.2008, directing confiscation of 100% of the seized stock was modified and ordered to confiscate 15% of the seized

stock.

2) Heard Mr.Rohan Raval, learned APP for the applicant – State and Mr.P.P. Majmudar, learned counsel for the respondent.

Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri Mar 27 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Mar 29 07:48:06 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.RA/717/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026

0.8726307908211187

3) Brief facts of the case are that, on 15.01.2007, inspection was made at the premise of the respondent managed by Tarachand Dolatram Choithani carrying his business at Plot No.369/3 at GIDC Chitra, Bhavnagar. That the stock worth of Rs.5,55,448/- was seized from the premise of the respondent in connection with contravention of The Essential Commodities Order as well as PDS Control Order-6(4). That the offence came to be registered against

the respondent under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

4) Therefore, the respondent was issued notice under section 6(B)-

1(A) of the Essential Commodities Act dated 05.01.2008. On service of the notice, respondent appeared through advocate and submitted his reply. After hearing the respondent, Collector was not satisfied with the explanation furnished by the respondent and ordered to confiscate entire stock seized by order dated 03.07.2008. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of Collector, Bhavnagar, the respondent preferred Appeal No.55 and 2008 in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge Bhavnagar, in which, the learned 2^nd Addl. Sessions Judge vide order dated 24.04.2013 has been pleased to partly allow the said appeal and order of Collector, Bhavnagar, dated 03.07.2008, directing confiscation of 100% of the seized stock was modified and ordered to confiscate 15% of the seized stock. Hence, present

revision application preferred by the State.

5) Mr. Rohan Raval, learned APP for the applicant – State has submitted that during the course of inspection, statement of person in charge was recorded wherein irregularities mentioned in the show- cause notice have been admitted and not followed. Therefore, in the written reply to the show cause notice, the respondent might have not admitted certain irregularities, which

Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Fri Mar 27 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Mar 29 07:48:06 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.RA/717/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026

0.8726307908211187

does not mean that there is no admission of irregularities. It is also submitted that, learned Sessions Judge failed to consider that it was incumbent upon the respondent to maintain true and correct account of stock under the Orde