THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.301 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The petitioner is proprietor of M/s Majeti Venkata Mutyala rao Rice and Kiana Business, Tanuku. On credible information that the petitioner is storing stocks in an unauthorised go-down and selling the same at excess rates, the Assistant Grain Purchasing Officer, Tanukur Cicle,Vigilanceand Enforcement, Eluru, inspected his business premises of the petitioner along with the mediators on 19.04.2010 and found the petitioner doing clandestine business and accordingly seized the said stocks. The following charges were framed against the petitioner for the irregularities committed by him. 1. That the respondent is doing clandestine business for his personal gain. He contravened the clauses 3 of A.P.S.C.D. (Licence Storage and Order), 2008 read with Section 7 of E.C. Act,1955. 2. That the dealer has illegally stored the said rice and Bengal gram dal unauthorisedly in an unauthorised godown which was not incorporated in the FGL. On interrogation the dealer accepted his guilt that he stored the stocks illegally in unauthorised godown. Thus the dealer violated the provision of APSCD (Licence Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008. 3. That it is also noticed hat the dealer is not furnishing ‘C’ return to concerned authorities violating condition 4 of the FGL licence. Upto date stock positions were also not shown in the price cum stock board. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to submit an explanation. In pursuance of which, the petitioner appeared before the Joint Collector and stated that he obtained FGL, but due to expansion of business, he has taken another godown and approached Assistant Grain Purchase Officer and as per his advice, submitted relevant papers to the Commercial Tax Department and after obtaining R.C. the new godown is to be included in F.G.L. and there is no mala fide intention to indulge in clandestine business. Being not satisfied with the explanation of the petitioner, the Joint Collector ordered for confiscation of the seized stock. Aggrieved by the order of the Joint Collector, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru and the learned Principal District Judge, through the impugned order, while confirming the order of the Joint Collector however, ordered for confiscation of 50% of the seized stock and directed the balance to be released n favour of the petitioner. Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed the present revision. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that confiscation of 50% of seized stock is unreasonable and accordingly modify the same to 25%. Accordingly, the said order of confiscation passed by the Joint Collector, West Godavari, as modified by the Principal District Judge, West Godavari, Rluru in appeal, is modified and the confiscation of the stocks is reduced to 25%. The Criminal Revision Case is dismissed with the above modification. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 14th February 2011 pnb