Uttarakhand High Court
Atul Patwal vs State Of Uttarakhand on 6 April, 2013
Author: U.C. Dhyani
Bench: U.C. Dhyani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Appn. (C-482) No. 339 of 2013
Atul Patwal ............. Applicant
versus
State of Uttarakhand ............. Respondent
Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the applicant / petitioner. Mr. P.S. Saun, AGA for the respondent State.
Hon'ble U.C. Dhyani, J. (oral) [ By way of present application / petition, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicant / petitioner seeks to set aside the impugned order dated 25.07.2012, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in case crime no. 245 of 2012 under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act and order dated 14.01.2013, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Revision No. 438 of 2012, captioned as Atul Patwal vs. State. A further prayer has also been made requesting the Court to pass appropriate orders for release of gas cylinders of the applicant confiscated in case crime no. 245 of 2012 under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act in favour of the applicant.
2) The applicant moved an application for release of gas cylinders in his favour before the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. Said application was rejected by the learned Magistrate on 2 the grounds, inter alia, that the applicant Atul Patwal was the owner of the truck which was confiscated. Atul Patwal was neither the owner of the gas cylinders nor does he run the Gas Agency. A case under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act was instituted against the driver Rajendra Singh and three others.
3) A criminal revision was preferred against the said order, which was decided by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Roorkee, Haridwar on 14.01.2013. The criminal revision was dismissed on the ground that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to hear the application.
4) Learned counsel for the applicant, in course of hearing of present petition / application, presented a letter written on behalf of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, which was addressed to M/s Siddhbali Carriers, Patel Marg, Kotdwar. Applicant, in para 3 of the present petition, has indicated that he is a transporter having a Firm under the name and style of M/s Siddhbali Carriers. It was also said that the applicant has deployed drivers for said work of transportation. Vide said letter written on behalf of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., it requested M/s Siddhbali Carriers to get the cylinders of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. released from the Court so that the same may be put to circulation. It was also mentioned in the letter that the delivery of cylinders to the respective Agency was the 3 responsibility of M/s Siddhbali Carriers and since M/s Siddhbali Carriers could not deliver the cylinders to Joshimath Gas Agency, therefore, the payment of the transporter has been put on hold till the recovery of the amount of the gas cylinders. Thus, it is clear that the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. has authorized M/s Siddhbali Carriers to get the gas cylinders released. Applicant Atul Patwal is the proprietor of the said Firm.
5) It was held by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Sirazuddin vs. State of U.P. and others, 2011 (3) ACR 3040, that such jurisdiction lies with the Magistrate as well as the Special Judge (E.C.) Act. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in Virendra Pal Singh vs. State of U.P., 2008 (60) ACC 4481 : 2008 (2) ACR 144 and Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, 2003 (46) ACC 223.
6) Application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed. Impugned orders passed by the courts below are hereby set aside. Learned Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate is directed to release the aforesaid gas cylinders in supurdgi of M/s Siddhbali Carriers on furnishing personal bonds and adequate security to its satisfaction on the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall undertake in writing that the property in question 4 shall be produced as and when required by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and before the court below during the pendency of the case at his own expenses.
ii) The applicant shall also give an undertaking in writing that the property in question shall not be alienated in any manner during the pendency of the case before the court below.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.) Dt. April 06, 2013.
Negi 5