HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA Criminal Revision Case No.327 of 2005 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the State against the judgment dated 23.02.2001 in Criminal Appeal No.132 of 1998 on the file of the Sessions Judge at Khammam whereby and whereunder the order of the Joint Collector, Khammam, dated 10.7.1995 for confiscation of the entire seized stock of 660 litres of PDS Kerosene, 4 iron drums, 2 plastic cans and one cycle- rickshaw fitted with iron drum to the Government was modified ordering the return of 460 litres of kerosene, 4 iron drums, 2 plastic cans and one cycle-rickshaw. 2. The facts leading to filing of this revision can be summarised as follows: The Inspector of Police (VC-CSD), Khammam-complainant on receipt of information on 29.4.1995 at 12.00noon that the Kerosene hawker of Vallabhi village was indulging in clandestine business in distribution of PDS kerosene and not maintaining correct accounts of oil, he along with the staff and mediators surprised the house bearing No.2-59 at Vallabhi village belonging to Potla Babu and found one person Daggupati Venkaiah. During the course of enquiry, the hawker stated that the licence for kerosene oil is said to be available in Mandal Revenue Office, Mudigonda for renewal and that he had lifted 1050 litres of kerosene on 17.4.1995 as against the monthly allotment of 2080 litres. The complainant inspected the stock register and found that it was not properly maintained and made false entries as 600 litres of kerosene oil. The complainant also found that the issue register was also not properly maintained. On physical verification, the stock lifted was 1030 litres, stock distributed was 486 litres, stock balance was 544 litres, ground stock 660 litres and the variation was 116 litres excess. The hawker by making fictitious entries in the register showed as if he issued kerosene oil to the card holders, and preserved 116 litres of excess with a view to sell the same in black-market without distribution. For non-maintenance of true and correct accounts of the kerosene oil distribution, for variation in stocks and for violation of Cl.4 of A.P.S.C. (RDCS) Order 1973 and Cl.3, 12 and 13 of A.P. Petroleum Products (L & RS) Order 1980 and its licensing conditions issued to hawker, the complainant seized the ground stock of 660 litres of PDS kerosene along with 2 iron drums, 2 plastic cans and one cycle-rickshaw fitted with drum under the cover of Panchanama. A show cause notice was issued to the respondent directing him to file a written representation if any against the proposed grounds of confiscation. 3. In response to the said notice, the respondent filed a written explanation stating that he was distributing PDS kerosene oil to the card holders of Vallabhi village without any complaint either from the card holders or from officials from any point of time. The complainant without verifying the issue register has booked the case. He was forced to sign the Panchanama and the complainant did not verify the records at all. He requested to peruse the seized register and to drop the case while releasing the seized property. 4. The Joint Collector after perusing the entire material on record observed that in the absence of valid records it is evident that the hawker has failed to maintain correct and true accounts. As such, for improper maintenance of records and non-maintenance of true and correct accounts of the kerosene oil distribution by the kerosene hawker and for violation of Cl. 4 of A.P.S.C. (RDCS) Order 1973 and Cl.3,12 and 13 of A.P. Petroleum Products ( L & RS) Order 1980, the Joint Collector ordered for confiscation of entire seized stock i.e. 660 litres of PDS kerosene, 4 Iron drums, 2 plastic cans and one cycle-rickshaw fitted with iron drum to the Government. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Joint Collector, the respondent filed Criminal Appeal No.132 of 1998 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Khammam and the learned Sessions Judge after taking into consideration the entire evidence and material placed on record, modified the order as stated in Para No.1 supra. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed by the State. 6. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 7. A perusal of the record goes to show that the respondent had committed irregularities in distributing PDS Kerosene by not maintaining true and correct accounts, which are contrary to the statutory provisions of law. He had also not properly explained about the variation in the stock. However, it is to be seen that earlier to the raid conducted by the Inspector of Police, there were no complaints from the customers against the respondent with regard to any irregularity in distributing the PDS kerosene. Further, there were no instances of hoarding and black marketing of kerosene by the respondent. In that view of the matter, the learned Sessions Judge modified the confiscation order of the Joint Collector. Therefore, this court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference by this court. 8. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case fails and the same is hereby dismissed. _________________ B.N.RAO NALLA,J 21 -10-2010 Stp