IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR MUDDAMAL) NO. 2451 of

2025 ==========================================================

AKBAR OSMAN RAYMA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR JAY N SHAH(10668) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR NIRAJ SHARMA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 22/04/2026

ORDER

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent – State.

2. The present application filed under Sections 438 read with section 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, challenges the order dated 18.11.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kutch-Bhuj in Criminal Appeal No.123 of 2025, confirming the order dated 06.06.2025 passed by the District Collector in Case No.37 of 2024, whereby the District Collector, Bhuj-Kutch had ordered for seizure of the product considering it to be a hydrocarbons inflammable petroleum product of 19,000 litres worth Rs.14,44,000/- and for confiscation the 100% of its value. The said petroleum product was considered as hazardous waste for confiscation.

3. Mr. Jay N.Shah, learned Advocate for the applicant referring to the facts of the matter and relying upon the tax invoice submitted that the product was industrial oil with the detail specification that the product would be used for legitimate purpose only and shall not be used or consumed for any other purpose including, but not limited to edible oils, pharma application or fuel adulteration. Advocate Mr. Shah submitted that the description clarifies that it would be only for the industrial use.

3.1 As per advocate Mr. Shah, the place of its origin and the specification regarding the consignee and the buyer has been clarified in the tax invoice and when the vehicle was intercepted, the driver had provided copy of all the e- way bills and other supporting evidence, in spite of that, the vehicle No.GJ-12 W-8958 along with 19,000 litres product was seized and the seizure was made of three books, one electric motor and one dispenser.

3.2 Learned advocate Mr. Shah submitted that the product was ordered to be confiscated on the basis of report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Gandhinagar, which found that the liquid was not satisfying the characteristic of bio-diesel, LDO flash-point and diesel distillation and the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons were found, which Mr. Shah submitted that it is a normal petroleum product, which would be found in any of the petroleum product or its mixture including the base oil.

3.3 The contention of learned advocate Mr. Shah is that the industrial oil is not an essential oil product for the Collector to exercise his jurisdiction under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Mr. Shah stated that the Collector found the Tanker carrying 19,000 litres inflammable petroleum product without any NOC and it was observed that no explosive license was produced. Mr. Shah stated that industrial oil would carry no such requirement.

3.4 Learned advocate Mr. Shah has relied upon the judgments, in the case of (i) M.D. Agency Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr., 1977 (1) GLH 768, (ii) Moghal Mamadbeg Sherbeg Vs. AWP David, 1978 (1) GLR 601, (iii) Vijaypal Gupta Vs. State of Delhi, 1982 Cr.L.J. 1337, and specific reliance has been placed in the case of Lubricating Oil Dealers Association Vs. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2017 Calcutta 201.

4. Countering the arguments, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Niraj Sharma submitted that the FSL report was taken into consideration for the order of confiscation. Mr. Sharma stated that the flash point, which was noticed in the sample was 59.5 degree centigrade and thus, submitted that it would fall under the category of petroleum class-B. Mr. Sharma submitted that the the scientific officer found presence of pe