V.Naga Raju, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 177 OF 2010 Criminal Revision Case under Section 397 & 401 of Cr'P.C against the Judgment dated 31-12-2009 Passed in crl.A.No. 123 of 2009 on the file of the court of Sessions Judge, at Karimnagar confirmino]!!gorder dated 22.10.2OO9 in File No. G3l4Ot2OOg on the file of the court ot tfrSEotlector, Karimnagar' Between:

V.Naga Raju, S/o Rajesham,aged about 51 years, Occ: Business, Proprietor of Shiv, Rice Depot, Karimnagar District.

..PETITIONER/APPE LLANT/RESPONDE NT AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A'P', at Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENT cRLRCMP. NO: 261 OF 2010 Petition under section 397 (1) CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the Judgment dt.31-12-2009 in crl.A.No. 123 of 2009 on the ille of the Court of Sessions Judge, at Karimnagar, which was passed-by modifying the order passed by the District Collector, Karimnagar in File No.eila6lZOOS , dt.22-to-2o09, pending disposal of above Criminal Revision Case .

( Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. A PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel forthe Respondent : ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(TS) The Court made the following: ORDER

a) THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No,177 of 2OLO ORDER:

The present Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 40i of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr,P.C.), against the judgment dated 31.12.2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No.123 of 2009, by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, confirming the order dated 22.10.2009 passed in File No.G3/40/2009, by the District Collector, Karimnagar, while modifying the extent of confiscation of seized stock from 100o/o to 2 5olo.

2.

The facts of the case are as under The petitioner is proprietor of M/s. Shiva Rice Depot, Karimnagar, on receipt of credible information that he was indulging in clandestine business in sale of Food Grains i.e. Rice, he and Tahsildhar Vigilance and Enforcement and its staff have visited the locality and verified stock register, receipt submitted for obtaining license. After verification it is noticed that the dealer was maintaining the stock register from 1.10.2008 and the last sale of transaction was 15.12.2008 and he has stated that there were no sales from 16.12.2008 to till 06.01.2009. As per stock register the available stock is 378 quintals, but actual

JS, l CRL. R.C.No.177 of 2010 rice available on ground balance was 346 quintals, thus they found variation of 31.50 quintals of rice, which is contravention of Section 3 of A.P. Scheduled Commodities (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008. fhe dealer is also not issuing bills and not submitting C-Form returns to the Licensing authority as per the rules. They seized the available stock of 68.25 quintals of BPT rice, 110.50 quintals of Superfine rice and 167.75 quintals of fine rice in all worth Rs.6, 19,625/- under cover of panchanama and booked a case under Section 6-4 of E.C. Act. Aggrieved by the said seizure the appellant filed W.P.No.400 of 2009 wherein it is directed vide W.P.M.P.No.474 of 2009 the goods seized should not be sold till disposal of the appeal.

After hearing the contentlons of the respondent the learned Collector ordered for confiscation of 100o/o value of the stock to the Government. The learned Sessions Judge, by judgment, dated 31,L2.2009, modified the appeal but however reduced the confiscation of stock from 100o/o to 25o/o. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is preferred by the petitioner. 3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri A.Prabhakar Rao and learned Assistant public prosecutor representing for the respon de nt-state and perused the material available on record.

ls' l CRL. R.C. No.177 of 2010 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the quantum of confiscation ordered by the Collector, and reduced by the lower appellate Court, may further be reduced to 10%. I I I I 5.

Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, however, does not dispute reduction in percentage of seized stock 6.

On a perusal of the material available on record, it is obvious that the petitioner has not maintained any correct books by issuing bills and there is variation of stock was found in the mill as against the records maintained by the petitioner. On appreciation of facts and circumstances of the case, the lower appellate Court having observed that the confiscation ordered by the District Collector is excessive and disproportionate to the violation alleged, modified the order of the District Collector by reducing the confiscation of stock from lOOo/o to 25o/o. This Court finds no illegality or irregularity in the judgment passed by the lower appellate Court. But however, to meet the ends of justice and in the circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to reduce the said confiscation f rom 25o/o to 10o/o .

7.

With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

ls,.l CRL.R.C.No.177 of 2010 Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/.A.V.S.S.C.S.M.SARMA DEPU //TRUE COPY// SE o o FICER I To,

1. The Sessions Judge, at Karimnagar .(with records if any)

2. The District Collector, Karimnagar. .(with records if any)

3. The Assistant Supply Officer Sircilla Karimnagar District' 4.TwoCCstoPublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelangana'at Hyderabad.(OUT)

5. One CC to SRl. A PRABHAKAR RAO Advocate [OPUC]

6. Two CD CoPies

7. One Spare CoPY CDL

HIGH COURT DATED:1510712022

ORDER

CRLRC.N o.177 of 2010 ''...''1.''.

-1 2B rlti ?tla \,'1 DISPOSING OF THE CRL.R.C q )),-