HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:700 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The revision is filed by the petitioner against the judgment made on 29.07.2010 in Crl.A.No.109 of 2008 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal, modifying the order dated 3.10.2008 passed by the District Collector, Warangal, in ECAC No.77 of 2008. On 23.7.2008, the Grain Purchasing Assistant, Warangal, along with UDRI (mill levy), Warangal surprised the rice mill of the petitioner situated at Vecharani village of Cherial Mandal and on verification, found that there was a variation of (-) 157 quintals in stock of paddy, (-) 25 quintals of rice and (+) 132 quintals of raw broken rice and also noticed that paddy was not milled but electricity bills showed consumption of 10,040 units and pay of Rs.59,508/- towards charges. Thus, the petitioner was found indulging in clandestine business by evading levy to the FCI and hoarding a huge quantity of paddy in contravention of Clauses 3,4 and 16 of A.P. Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984 and hence, 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, Warangal, after holding an enquiry, rejected the contentions put forth by the petitioner and ordered confiscation of 20% value of the seized stock. The said order, dated 03.10.2008 was questioned by filing an appeal before the Sessions Court, Warangal, under Section 6-C of the Essential Commodities Act and the same was numbered as Crl.A.No.109 of 2008 and the learned Sessions Judge, by judgment, dated 29.07.2010, while confirming the findings of the District Collector, reduced the confiscation of 20% value of the seized stock to 10%. 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 appears that the petitioner was found indulging in illegal business by purchasing paddy at lower prices without making any entries about purchase in the stock register and doing clandestine business by milling paddy, converting it into rice and was in the habit of selling paddy and rice in the open market for pecuniary benefits by evading levy to the FCI and thus, he contravened Clause 3, 4 & 16 of the A.P. Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984. But however, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Sessions Judge has taken a lenient view and ordered confiscation of 10% only. I do not see any merits in this revision. But however, as the said confiscation was effected in the year 2008, this Court is inclined to reduce the said confiscation from 10% to 4%. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. __________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada Dated: 23.3.2011 Nn HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:700 OF 2011 23.3.2011