THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.681 of 2004 JUDGMENT: The petitioner is proprietor of M/s Haryana Fertilizers, Nizamabad. On credible information that the petitioner is storing fertilizers in an unauthorised go-down and selling the said fertilizers at excess rates, the Inspector of Police, Vigilance Cell Civil Supplies Department, Nizamabad, inspected his business premises along with the mediators on 16.07.1997 and found the petitioner doing clandestine business. On demand, he produced certain documents to establish that he is having valid licence, stock register, etc. Further, as there is a variation in stocks and there was no proper explanation, the entire stock was seized and the matter was reported to the Joint Collector for initiation of necessary proceedings. Pursuant to the said reference, the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act has been initiated and the petitioner was served with a notice calling for his explanation. The Joint Collector, Nizamabad, after holding an enquiry, rejected the contentions put forth by the petitioner, and found that the petitioner contravened the provisions of Clauses 7 and 35 of Fertilizer Control Orders and accordingly, by her order, dated 21.04.1998, ordered confiscation of the entire seized stock. The said order, dated 21.04.1998 was questioned by filing an appeal under Section 6-C of the Essential Commodities Act and the same was numbered as Criminal Appeal No.38 of 1998 and the learned Sessions Judge, Nizamabad by his judgment, dated 22.05.2003, dismissed the same. The said judgment, dated 22.05.2003, is questioned in this Revision. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Having considered the submissions and on perusal of the relevant material available on record, this Court is of the view that the petitioner was in possession of fertilizers in unauthorised go-down and for the said stocks, he could not offer a proper explanation. In fact, the authorities below not being satisfied with the explanation offered by the petitioner for the variation in the stocks, ordered confiscation. Accordingly, I see no merits in this Revision. However, as the said offence is of the year 1997 and the entire stock is valued at Rs.1,64,843/-, this Court is of the view that some relief can be given to the petitioner. Accordingly, the said order of confiscation passed by the Joint Collector, Nizamabad, as was confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Nizamabad in appeal, is modified and the confiscation of the stocks is restricted to 50%. Except the said modification, in all other aspects, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 17th February 2011 DR