HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:600 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The revision is filed by the petitioner against the judgment made on 25.10.2010 in Crl.A.No.123 of 2010 by the Sessions Judge, Ananthapur, confirming the order dated 2.9.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent in Roc.No.B6/1546/2010. The Vigilance & Enforcement Team Officers raided the godown of the petitioner, bearing D.No.635-1, situated near Kasi Visweswara Temple, B.K. Samudram and found 1191 bags each of 30 kgs of groundnut pods filled in HDPE bags (white) certified by the A.P. Seed Certification Agency, Kurnool. The worth of each bag containing 30 kgs is of Rs.1105-50. On enquiry, it is found that the above stocks are kept illegally and unauthorizedly and without any valid licence and permission. As the same was in contravention of provisions of clause 3 (1) of Seed Control Order, 1983, the entire stock was seized and the matter was reported to the District Collector for initiation of necessary proceedings. Pursuant to the said reference, the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act had been initiated and the petitioner was served with a notice calling for his explanation. The District Collector, Anantapur, after holding an enquiry, rejected the contentions put forth by the petitioner and ordered confiscation of 100% of the seized stock. The said order, dated 02.09.2010 was questioned by filing an appeal before the Sessions Court, Anantapur, and the same was numbered as Crl.A.No.123 of 2010 and the learned Sessions Judge, by judgment, dated 25.10.2010, confirmed the order of the District Collector. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is preferred by the petitioner. Heard and perused the material available on record. On a perusal of the material available on record, it is obvious that the petitioner had unauthorizedly stored 357.3 quintals of groundnut pod in unauthorized premises and thus, he contravened Clause 3 of Seed Control Order, 1983. In view of the concurrent findings of both the authorities, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment under appeal. But however, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to reduce the said confiscation from 100% to 75%. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. __________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada Dated: 21.3.2011 Nn HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:600 OF 2011 21.3.2011