Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mahalingappa, is the registered owner of a truck bearing registration No.KA-32/B-2604. On 30.11.2011, the PSI of Shahabad Police Station seized the truck along with food grains, alleging violation of Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and registered an FIR. The petitioner had hired the truck to Messrs. Abdul Gani Trading Company of Jewargi to transport food grains to Hyderabad, with necessary permission and documents. The petitioner requested the Deputy Commissioner (Food & Civil Supplies) for release of the vehicle, but the Deputy Commissioner issued an endorsement dated 18.02.2012 (Annexure-F) rejecting the request. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order and for release of the vehicle. The High Court, after hearing both sides, observed that the vehicle could be released on interim custody pending confiscation proceedings, subject to the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle as assessed by the Deputy Commissioner, and on executing an undertaking not to alienate or transfer the vehicle and to produce it as and when required. The court directed the Deputy Commissioner to assess the value of the vehicle and communicate it to the petitioner within two weeks, and upon furnishing the bank guarantee and undertaking, the vehicle was to be released forthwith.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Essential Commodities Act - Interim Custody of Seized Vehicle - Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - The petitioner, owner of a truck seized for alleged violation of the Act, sought release of the vehicle pending confiscation proceedings. The Deputy Commissioner had rejected the request. The High Court held that the vehicle could be released on interim custody subject to the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle as assessed by the Deputy Commissioner, and on executing an undertaking not to alienate or transfer the vehicle and to produce it as and when required. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, as registered owner of a vehicle seized for alleged violation of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, is entitled to interim custody of the vehicle pending confiscation proceedings.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the Deputy Commissioner to assess the value of the vehicle and communicate it to the petitioner within two weeks. Upon the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the assessed value and executing an undertaking not to alienate or transfer the vehicle and to produce it as and when required, the vehicle was to be released forthwith.
Law Points
- Interim custody of vehicle seized under Essential Commodities Act
- 1955
- Sections 3 and 7
- pending confiscation proceedings
- Release of vehicle on furnishing bank guarantee
- Principles of justice and equity
Case Details
2013 LawText (KAR) (06) 32
W.P.No.100234 of 2013 (GM-POLICE)
Sri Deepak Barad (for petitioner), Sri Manvendra Reddy (for respondents)
The Deputy Commissioner (Food & Civil Supplies), Gulbarga and The State through Shahabad Police Station
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of an order rejecting release of seized vehicle and for direction to release the vehicle.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 18.02.2012 passed by the Deputy Commissioner and for release of the vehicle bearing No.KA-32/B-2604.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's vehicle was seized on 30.11.2011 for alleged violation of Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the Deputy Commissioner rejected the request for release of the vehicle.
Previous Decisions
The Deputy Commissioner issued an endorsement dated 18.02.2012 (Annexure-F) rejecting the petitioner's request for release of the vehicle.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim custody of the seized vehicle pending confiscation proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the vehicle was hired with necessary permission and documents, and that the seizure was unjustified.
Respondents opposed the release, presumably on grounds that the vehicle was involved in violation of the Act and might be subject to confiscation.
Ratio Decidendi
A vehicle seized under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, can be released on interim custody pending confiscation proceedings, subject to the owner furnishing a bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle and an undertaking to produce the vehicle as and when required, to balance the interests of justice and the need to secure the vehicle for potential confiscation.
Judgment Excerpts
Petitioner, a registered owner of the motor vehicle being a truck bearing certificate of registration No.KA-32-B-2604 when hired by Messrs. Abdul Gani Trading Company of Jewargi to transport food grains to Hyderabad along with necessary permission from the trader and relevant documents, the PSI of Shahabad Police Station on 30.11.2011 alleging violation of Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) seized the food grains and the truck and registered an FIR.
Petitioner’s request for release of the motor vehicle led to the Deputy Commissioner issuing an endorsement dated 18.02.2012 Annexure-F calling upon the petitioner to...
In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. The Deputy Commissioner is directed to assess the value of the vehicle and communicate the same to the petitioner within two weeks from today. On the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle as assessed by the Deputy Commissioner and on executing an undertaking not to alienate or transfer the vehicle and to produce the vehicle as and when required, the vehicle shall be released forthwith.
Procedural History
The petitioner's vehicle was seized on 30.11.2011. The petitioner requested release from the Deputy Commissioner, who rejected the request by endorsement dated 18.02.2012. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date, which was heard and disposed of on 19.06.2013.
Acts & Sections
- Essential Commodities Act, 1955: 3, 7
- Constitution of India: 226, 227
