Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Shaikh Yunus and Dinesh Bagade, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) challenging an order dated 10 April 2017 passed by the Collector, Aurangabad. The Collector had directed the release of a truck (registration No. MH20CT 1579) in favour of petitioner No.1 on furnishing a bank guarantee for 50% of its estimated value, and ordered the sale of seized rice by public auction with proceeds to be deposited in the State Government account. The background facts are that on 20 July 2016, police intercepted the truck carrying rice meant for public distribution system, suspected to be taken to Gujarat for open market sale. The driver and cleaner could not provide satisfactory answers, leading to registration of an offence under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 against the petitioners and two others. The rice was unloaded in a government godown. Petitioner No.1, claiming ownership of the truck, filed an application under Section 457 CrPC for interim custody. The Collector passed the impugned order. The petitioners challenged the order on the ground that the Collector had no jurisdiction to order sale of rice or impose conditions for release of the truck. The legal issues were whether the Collector had power under the Essential Commodities Act to order sale of seized goods and whether the procedure under Section 459 CrPC for disposal of perishable property was required. The petitioners argued that the Collector's order was without authority of law and that the proper course was to approach the Magistrate under Section 459 CrPC. The State supported the Collector's order. The court analyzed that the Essential Commodities Act does not confer any power on the Collector to order sale of seized commodities or to impose conditions for release of vehicles. The court held that when goods are seized and are perishable, the authority must follow Section 459 CrPC by making an application to the Magistrate for an order of sale. The Collector's order was without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. The court allowed the application, quashed the Collector's order, and directed the petitioners to approach the Magistrate for appropriate orders regarding custody of the truck and disposal of the rice. The court also directed the Magistrate to decide the application expeditiously.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 482 - Inherent Powers - Quashing of Collector's Order - The High Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to set aside an order passed by the Collector, Aurangabad, directing sale of seized rice and release of truck on bank guarantee, as the Collector lacked authority under the Essential Commodities Act to pass such orders without reference to the Magistrate under Section 459 CrPC (Paras 2, 8). B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 459 - Disposal of Perishable Property - Sale of Seized Goods - The court held that when goods seized are perishable, the Collector or any authority must follow the procedure under Section 459 CrPC by making an application to the Magistrate for order of sale, and cannot suo motu order public auction. The Collector's order was without jurisdiction (Paras 6-8). C) Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Sections 3 and 7 - Seizure of Essential Commodities - The Act does not confer power on the Collector to order sale of seized commodities or to impose conditions for release of vehicle. Such powers are governed by the CrPC, and the Collector's order was ultra vires (Paras 3, 7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Collector has the power under the Essential Commodities Act to order sale of seized rice by public auction and to direct release of the truck on furnishing bank guarantee, without following the procedure under Section 459 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The impugned order dated 10 April 2017 passed by the Collector, Aurangabad is quashed and set aside. The petitioners are at liberty to approach the Magistrate for appropriate orders regarding custody of the truck and disposal of the rice. The Magistrate is directed to decide the application expeditiously.
Law Points
- Section 482 CrPC
- Section 457 CrPC
- Section 459 CrPC
- Essential Commodities Act
- 1955
- Sections 3 and 7
- Power of Collector to order sale of seized goods
- Interim custody of vehicle pending trial
