Ranjana Thakur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta - Court Judgment

CRR No.2423/2012 Criminal Revision No.2423/2012 4.2.2014 Shri Piyush Bhatnagar, counsel for the applicant.

Shri R.N.Yadav, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent.

Heard on admission.

The applicant has challenged the order dated 11.6.2012 passed by the Collector, Sagar in case No.238 B/121 of year 2011-12, by which kerosene was confiscated.

Also the order dated 7.11.2012 passed by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in criminal appeal No.305/2012 is challenged, by which the appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed.

The prosecution's case, in short, is that, on 24.10.2009, DSP EOW, Sadar Bazar, Sagar has found 6,000 liters of blue kerosene in the house of one Manish Rathore.

It was also found that from Mahila Jagriti Prathamik Sahkari Up-bhandar shop, 6,000 liters of kerosene was missing.

It is also found that some irregularities were done by the applicant in keeping the stock of sugar and wheat.

The Manager Chhotu S/o Hiralal Bansal was found in the shop at that time but, no stock register was shown by him to the inspecting authority.

On 25.1.2009, the stock register was submitted for CRR No.2423/2012 perusal and it was found that 5,200 liters of kerosene was not available in the stock.

The matter was submitted to the Collector for confiscation of the property seized from Manish Rathore.

In reply, the applicant has submitted that on 17.10.2009 there was a festival of Deepawali and therefore, being inflammable substance, kerosene was shifted from the shop, so that any mis happening may not take place due to crackeRs.The kerosene was shifted for the period of Deepawali to Ekadashi and it was duly distributed to the card holders and therefore, the charges were denied.

The learned Collector, after considering the evidence adduced by the parties, passed an order to confiscate 45 kgs of sugar and 5,200 liters of kerosene and cost of such substance was directed to be recovered from the applicant.

In appeal, the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar dismissed the appeal.

After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it was alleged by the applicant that she took the house of Manish Rathore on rent to keep the kerosene.

However, neither any permission was taken from the Collector, nor from the Chief Explosive Controller to CRR No.2423/2012 keep such kerosene in the house of Manish Rathore.

Also, if kerosene was shifted because shop of the applicant was in dense locality then, house of Manish Rathore was also in dense locality and therefore, reason for shifting kerosene shown by the applicant, appears to be false.

It appears that the applicant sold blue kerosene to Manish Rathore, which was given to the applicant for distribution amongst consumeRs.Under such circumstances, the act of the applicant falls within the purview of offence of Essential Commodities Act and therefore, if the entire substance was confiscated then, certainly, no illegality or perversity was done either by the Collector or by the appellate Court.

There is no reason to accept the present revision filed by the applicant.

Consequently, the present revision filed by the applicant Ranjana Thakur is hereby dismissed at motion stage by confirming the orders passed by both the Courts below.

A copy of the order be sent to both the Courts below alongwith their records for information and compliance.

(N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE Pushpendra