Gujarat High Court
Shreeji Baapa Oil Industries -Thro' ... vs State Of Gujarat on 18 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY
SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 601 of 2012
With
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 602 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No ========================================================== SHREEJI BAAPA OIL INDUSTRIES -THRO' C.R.VACCHANI (PARTNER) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
========================================================== Appearance:
MR NARENDRA L JAIN(5647) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS Date : 18/07/2025 ORAL COMMON JUDGMENT
1. Both these Criminal Revision Applications arise out of the same instance. Hence, both the applications are decided by present common judgment.
2. Criminal Revision Application No.601 of 2012 is filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 and 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the applicant with a prayer to Page 1 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined quash and set aside the order dated 29/09/2012 passed below Exh.-B/9 in Criminal Appeal No.6 of 2011 by the learned 7 th Additional Sessions Judge, Kutch-Bhuj whereby the appellant-
i.e. applicant of Criminal Revision Application No.601 of 2012 is ordered to deposit 60% amount instead of 100% amount for the muddamal palm oil in question before the concerned authority of the State Government within a period of thirty days from the date of the order.
3. Criminal Revision Application No.602 of 2012 is filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 and 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the applicant with a prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 29/09/2012 passed below Exh.B/8 in Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2011 by the learned 7 th Additional Sessions Judge, Kutch-Bhuj whereby the appellant i.e. applicant of Criminal Revision Application No.602 of 2012 is ordered to deposit 30% amount of fine instead of 100% amount of fine for the approximate amount of muddamal tanker of Rs.6,00,000/- before the concerned authority of the State Government within a period of thirty days from the date of the order.
Page 2 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined
4. Brief facts of the case are as under:
4.1. On 10/04/2010, a truck bearing registration no.GJ-12-V-
8037 was intercepted by the Vigilance Squad at Shamakhyali Check Post. The said truck was a tanker carrying 15680 k.g. of palm oil. Upon asking for relevant documents from the driver, the driver was unable to produce documents in order to satisfy the officers of the Vigilance Squad and therefore, the tanker as well as the goods were seized by preparing a panchnama.
4.2. Further proceedings were initiated against the applicant of Criminal Revision Application No.601 of 2012 before respondent no.2, Collector, Kutch and respondent no.2, Collector, Kutch passed order dated 25-29/01/2011 and forfeited the seized palm oil of 15680 k.g. approximate value of which is Rs.5,98,976/- as 100% value of the seized muddamal palm oil. Aggrieved by the same the applicant preferred Criminal Appeal No.6 of 2011 wherein the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhuj-Kutch passed impugned order while partly allowing the appeal and inspite of confiscated 100% amount, ordered to pay 60% amount of the Page 3 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined approximate value of muddamal palm oil of Rs.5,98,976/-. 4.3. Similarly, further proceedings were initiated against the applicant of Criminal Revision Application No.602 of 2012 before respondent no.2, Collector, Kutch and respondent no.2 Collector, Kutch passed order dated 25-29/01/2011 and forfeited the vehicle tanker in question approximate value of which is Rs.6,00,000/- as 100% value of the vehicle tanker. Aggrieved by the same, the applicant preferred Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2011 wherein learned 7 th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhuj-Kutch passed impugned order while partly allowing the appeal and inspite of confiscated 100% amount, ordered to pay 30% amount of the approximate value of muddamal vehicle i.e. tanker of Rs.6,00,000/-. 4.4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned orders, present Criminal Revision Applications are filed by the applicants herein.
5. Heard learned advocate for the applicants and learned APP Mr.Bhargav Pandya at length on the facts of the case as well as on the provisions of law.
Page 4 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined
6. Learned advocate for the present applicants submitted that impugned orders passed by the court below are contrary to the evidence on record and the same are therefore illegal and unjust. He further submitted that the impugned orders are passed without giving appropriate reasons and the learned court below has failed to appreciate the fact that there was proper documents with regard to the goods that were being transported.
7. Learned advocate for the applicant in Criminal Revision Application No.601 of 2012 submitted at length facts of sizer order and vehemently argued that the goods were being imported by one NCML Exim Pvt. Ltd. at Kandla and were sold to Shree Ganeshya Enterprises upon payment of duty for which gate pass No.190882 was issued on 09/04/2010 and while the goods sold by NCLM Exim Pvt. Ltd. to Shree Ganeshya Enterprises was in transit, the said party i.e. Shree Ganeshya Enterprises sold the goods to the present petition on 09/04/2010 and on the very same day, the petitioner also sold the goods to one Astha Traders. He further submitted that as the transaction between Shri Ganeshaya Enterprises as well as Shreeji Bapa Oil Industries and Astha Traders Page 5 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined happened while the goods were in transit, it may have happened that at the time of checking, the documents available with the driver were not complete. This does not take away any merit of the fact that the goods that are involved in the case were sold and resold between the parties that are involved in the case. Learned advocate of the applicant referred the documentary evidence produced on record and vehemently argued that the invoices are produced on record of the said goods (palm oil). He further submitted that the concerned authority and the court below failed to appreciate the documentary evidence and passed the impugned order. Learned advocate of the applicant further referred to page-34 of the application and submitted that the notification issued by the Government of India that edible oil shall not require a permit or license under order issued under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
8. Learned advocate for the applicant in Criminal Revision Application No.602 of 2012 submitted that without application of mind, the concerned authority has fixed the value of the vehicle involved in the case which is not just and proper and the same is required to be interfered.
Page 6 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined
9. Learned advocate for the applicants further submitted the oral order of the co-ordinate bench of this Court dated 13/03/2012 passed in Criminal Revision Application No.416 of 2011 and lastly prayed to allow both the present criminal revision applications.
10. Per contra, learned APP for the State submitted that the impugned order passed by the appellate court is just and proper. The applicants have not produced any documents regarding the said article (palm oil) by way of bill or any other voucher. He further referred the Gujarat Essential Articles Dealers (Regulation) Order, 1977, Gujarat Essential Commodities Dealers (Regulation) Order, 1977, Department of Food and Civil Supply, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar dated 21/09/1977 and referred the provisions of Sections 6 and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and vehemently argued that seized muddamal palm oil imported by the concerned company with the condition not to sell in the State of Gujarat. He further submitted that the applicant purchased the said palm oil through local broker and breached the conditions. He further submitted that the concerned authority has Page 7 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined therefore rightly seized the muddamal edible oil (palm oil) and thereafter the Collector passed the order according to the provisions of law. He further submitted that thereafter the applicant filed the appeal before the appellate court and the appellate court passed the appropriate order reducing the amount for muddamal palm oil. He further submitted that the registration with the Mamlatdar is compulsory. The applicant has not registered or not obtained any license for the business of edible oil and not produced any documentary evidence relating to the registration or license for the same and thereby breached the provisions of law. Learned APP further submitted that the order of confiscation of the vehicle in question being tanker is also passed on appropriate ground that relevant documents are not produced at the time of confiscation. Therefore, there appears no any illegality or perversity in the impugned orders and lastly prayed to reject the present Criminal Revision Applications.
11. Relevant provisions of the Essential Commodities Act are reproduced here for the benefit of the case.
"6A. Confiscation of essential commodity.― [(1)] Where any [essential commodity is seized] in pursuance Page 8 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined of an order made under section 3 in relation thereto, [a report of such seizure shall, without unreasonable delay, be made to] the Collector of the district or the Presidency town in which such [essential commodity is seized] and whether or not a prosecution is instituted for the contravention of such order, the Collector [may, if he thinks it expedient so to do, direct the essential commodity so seized to be produced for inspection before him, and if he is satisfied] that there has been a contravention of the order [may order confiscation of--
(a) the essential commodity so seized;
(b) any package, covering or receptacle in which such essential commodity is found; and
(c) any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying such essential commodity:] Provided that without prejudice to any action which may be taken under any other provision of this Act, no foodgrains or edible oilseeds in pursuance of an order made under section 3 in relation thereto from a producer shall, if the seized foodgrains or edible oilseeds have been produced by him, be confiscated under this section:
[Provided further that in the case of any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used for the carriage of goods or passengers for hire, the owner of such animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance shall be given an option to pay, in lieu of its confiscation, a fine not exceeding the market price at the date of seizure of the essential commodity sought to be carried by such animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance.]"
12. I have gone through the records and considered the advanced arguments of learned advocate for the applicants and learned APP. I have also considered the relevant provisions involved in the subject matter. Page 9 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined
13. The applicant produced the copy of order passed by the Collector, Kutch dated 29/01/2011 at Annexure-B page-22 of Criminal Revision Application No.601 of 2012. It appears from the order that total 15680 k.g. palm oil was seized and thereafter by interim order dated 03/05/2010 released the same with the 100% bank guarantee and thereafter passed the final order to pay the approximate value of Rs.5,98,976/- for the seized edible oil. In other words, 100% amount be confiscated by the said order. Prima facie, it appears from the said order that no any findings or reasons are recorded to fix the approximate value of Rs.5,98,976/- of the seized muddamal palm oil. This fact is required to be considered.
14. Learned appellate court reduced the amount of confiscation and ordered to pay 60% price of the seized muddamal palm oil but failed to record the findings of approximate value of the seized muddamal palm oil and passed the order to pay 60% of the value of muddamal palm oil.
15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the subject matter, it appears that the concerned authority and the Page 10 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined learned appellate court used discretion vested to them and passed the orders to pay the amount of seized muddamal palm oil as well as the vehicle in question i.e. tanker. 15.1. Whenever use the discretion, it always appears that the same are used in the interest of justice. Herein this case being Criminal Revision Application No.601 of 2012, impugned order fixing the approximate price of the seized palm oil is passed without supporting any documentary evidence at the time of seizing the same. It is the obligation of the concerned authority i.e. respondent no.2 to ascertain the approximate price of muddamal seized through cogent evidence. This aspect is lapsed in the order of respondent no.2. Learned appellate court also failed to consider the said important aspect and passed the impugned order. Hence, the same requires to be interfered. In Criminal Revision Application No.602 of 2012 also, the concerned authority passed the order of penalty of Rs.6,00,000/- considering the approximate value of the vehicle in question i.e. tanker as Rs.6,00,000/- and the learned appellate court reduced the same to 30% of the amount without assigning any cogent reasons for the same.
Page 11 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/601/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined
16. After considering the facts of the case and documentary evidence produced on record as well as the provisions of law, this Court is of the view that the amount of confiscation imposed by the concerned authority is excessive as well as the order impugned in both the revision applications reducing the said amount to 60% for the muddamal palm oil and to 30% for the vehicle in question is also excessive. Hence, the impugned orders in both the Criminal Revision Applications require modification.
17. Accordingly, both these Criminal Revision Applications are hereby partly allowed by reducing the amount of confiscation to 30% instead of 60 % for muddamal palm oil of 15680 k.g. approximate value of which is Rs.5,98,976/- and to 20% instead of 30% for vehicle in question being tanker bearing registration no.GJ-12-V-8037 approximate value of which is Rs.6,00,000/-. Rest of the order passed by the court below shall remain the same. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(D. M. VYAS, J) ILA Page 12 of 12 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 23:53:22 IST 2025