Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat & vs Ossian L.P.G Bottling Ltd. - Thro' ... on 22 March, 2017
Author: Z.K.Saiyed
Bench: Z.K.Saiyed
R/CR.RA/183/2011 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY
SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 183 of 2011
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Applicant(s)
Versus
OSSIAN L.P.G BOTTLING LTD. - THRO' DISTRICT
COLLECTOR....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. N.J.SHAH, APP, for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
MR HASMUKH A SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date : 22/03/2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
By way of present application filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code 1973, the State of Gujarat and District Supply Officer have challenged the order dated Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 13 16:05:39 IST 2017 R/CR.RA/183/2011 JUDGMENT 16.08.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007 by the MACT (Auxillary) Fast Track Court. Nadiad, whereby the appeal filed by the respondents being No. 9 of 2007 is allowed and order dated 08.01.2007 passed by the District Supply Officer, Nadida has been quashed and set aside.
2. On the day of inception i.e. on 13.04.2006, the District Supply Officer, Nadiad alongwith panchas carried out inspection at the premises of the respondent and found that driver of the Tanker bearing registration No.GJ-12-U-5464 in connivance with other owner/partner had illegally committed theft of 350 Kg. LPG Gas, which was to be used in the residence. Thereby, the respondent has violated the provisions of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The District Supply Officer, Junagadh prepared the rojkam and then recorded statement of the respondent and seized the bearing registration No.GJ-12-U- 5464 worth Rs.6,00,000/- and 16,815 Kg. LPG worth Rs.4,44,094/- totaling to Rs.10,44,0993/-. Thereafter, a show- cause notice came to be issued to the respondent narrating the irregularities committed by the respondent on 19.10.2006. in pursuance of the issuance of show-cause notice, the respondent submitted reply denying the irregularities on 13.11.2006. After hearing both the sides, the District Collector, Kheda vide order dated 30.12.2006 confiscated 2256 Kg. LPG worth Rs.81,216/-. Against the aforesaid order of confiscation, the respondent preferred Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007, wherein, the notice was issued. After hearing the respective parties, the learned MACT (Aux.), Fast Track Court, Nadiad vide judgment and order dated 16.08.2010 was pleased to allow the appeal filed by the respondent herein by quashing and setting aside the order dated 08.1.2007 of the District Supply Officer, Nadiad and thereby, directed to release the Gas Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 13 16:05:39 IST 2017 R/CR.RA/183/2011 JUDGMENT Cylinders worth Rs.81,216/-.
3. Heard N.J.Shah, learned APP for the applicants and Mr. Hasmukh Shah, learned advocate for the respondent.
4. N.J.Shah, learned APP for the applicants the judgment and order passed by the learned MACT (Aux.), Fast Track Court, Nadiad is contrary to law and evidence on record. On the day of incident, when the District Supply Officer, Kheda visited the premises of the respondent, he found that the respondent had committed theft of 350 Kg. LPG. He contended that initially Criminal Case was registered against the respondent and others under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act as well as under Section 411 of the IPC, wherein, the respondent was acquitted. He contended that material evidence was produced by the District Supply Officer, Nadiad which goes against the respondent, which the learned trial Judge has not considered at all. He lastly prays to allow this application.
5. Mr. Hasmukh Shah, learned advocate for the respondent. He contended that for the very reason, Criminal Case was filed against the respondent and other persons under Sections 3 and 7 of the Act and under Section 411 of the IPC before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nadiad, wherein, all the accused persons including the respondent were acquitted from the charges levelled against them. Therefore, present revision application may be dismissed on that count alone. He therefore, urges that present application may be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers. Learned trial Judge has observed in para-
Page 3 of 4
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 13 16:05:39 IST 2017
R/CR.RA/183/2011 JUDGMENT
10 that It is not in dispute that Criminal Case No.7563 of 2006 was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nadiad, in which learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nadiad vide order dated 31.05.2007 acquitted the respondent-accused and other accused from the charges levelled against them under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act as well as under Section 411 of the IPC. It is further observed by the learned trial Judge that it is coming on record that the said order has been challenged or any appeal has been filled against the said order since three years have passed after passing of the order. Therefore, the learned trial Judge has rightly considered the facts of the case and order of the Nadiad District Supply Officer passed in Case No.52 of 2006 dated 08.01.2007 has rightly been set aside. In result, present Criminal Revision Application deserves fate of only rejection and hence, the same is hereby dismissed. Order dated 16.08.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007 by the MACT (Auxillary) Fast Track Court. Nadiad, is hereby confirmed. Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the trial Court concerned, forthwith.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) siddharth Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 13 16:05:39 IST 2017