HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C. No. 942 of 2011 ORDER: This criminal revision case is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, in Crl.A.No.15 of 2009 dated 15.10.2009 confirming the order of confiscation of the value of the entire seized stock of 185.50 quintals of BPT rice in favour of the Government passed by the Joint Collector, Nizamabad, in Case No.CS6/16/2009 dated 02.02.2009. It is the case of the prosecution that on 07.01.2009, the Assistant Supply Officer along with the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Vigilance and Enforcement, Ramachandrapuram, Medak District, inspected the business premises of the revision petitioner and found that he has indulged in clandestine business of BPT rice without possessing valid licence from the Licensing Authority and thereby contravened Clause 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Schedule Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008 and as such the Assistant Supply Officer has seized the available stock of 185.50 quintals of BPT rice. Thereafter, he lodged a report under Section 6-A of the E.C. Act with the Joint Collector, Nizamabad, for confiscation of entire seized stock in favour of the State. Pursuant thereto, the Joint Collector, Nizamabad, passed interim orders on 13.01.2009 for disposal of seized stock by the Tahsildar, Kamareddy, while issuing a show cause notice calling for the explanation of the revision petitioner under Section 6-B of the Act, to which the petitioner gave a reply. Subsequently, the Joint Collector, Nizamabad, passed an order dated 02.02.2009 confiscating the value of the entire seized stock of BPT rice in favour of the Government. Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner preferred an appeal being Crl.A.No.15 of 2009 and the Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, dismissed the said appeal, confirming the confiscation order passed by the Joint Collector, Nizamabad. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred this criminal revision. Heard both sides. Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on either side and having perused the impugned orders, this Court is of the view that the Joint Collector and the appellate Court rightly ordered confiscation of value of entire seized stock of BPT rice in favour of the Government. That apart, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner has also not produced any other material before me, which would discredit the evidence on record. In the circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment of the appellate Court. However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that some relief can be given to the petitioner and accordingly the said confiscation of value of entire seized stock of BPT rice in favour of the Government is reduced to 75% of value of seized stock. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed with the above modification. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 21-03-2011 Gsn.