IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15158 of 2009 1. SHAMBHU SHARAN GUPTA S/O INDRADEO SAO R/O VILL.- DUMRICHATTY, P.S. FATEHPUR, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER, FATEHPUR GAYA with CWJC No.14782 of 2009 1. SHAMBHU SHARAN GUPTA S/O INDRADEO SAO R/O VILL.- DUMRICHATTY, P.S. FATEHPUR, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER, FATEHPUR GAYA ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K.Agrawal, Sr. Advocate. 2 1.12.2009 Petitioner is permitted to add Collector , Gaya, as party respondent in these writ petitions. By these two writ petitions, the petitioner, who is the same in both writ petitions, has claimed release of public carrier truck bearing registration no. CG-04JB-2616 and 259 bags of wheat loaded thereon, as per seizure list, dated 26.8.2009 pursuant to which Fatehpur P.S.Case no. 144 of 2009 was instituted under Section 7 of E.C.Act. Petitioner alleges that on 21.8.2009 while having purchased the wheat, in question, from the agriculturists, he was transporting it to his place of business on his own public carrier truck, the same was detained by the Block Supply Officer, Fatehpur. When the same was neither confiscated nor was any case instituted and the detention being illegal, he filed an informatory petition before the learned C.J.,M.,Gaya on 25.8.09 with regard to illegal detention. On coming to know of the same on the next day i.e. 26.8.2009 only to save his skin the present seizure list was prepared and a formal FIR, as aforesaid, was lodged, inter alia, alleging that in 2 course of inspection in relation to food grains released from Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Godown, Fatehpur between 20 and 21st August, 2009, it was found that four dealers under Public Distribution System, whose names are disclosed in the FIR had been shown lifting of wheat and rice but the same was not found in their stocks. On this basis alone, it is alleged that the stock of what, as seized ,belongs to the Public Distribution System. Mr. N.K.Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of these two writ petitions submits that the petitioner had earlier moved this Court for release but this Court had directed the petitioner to move the Collector, Gaya,at the first instance. He moved the Collector, Gaya but the Collector by order dated 23.10.2009 merely on the allegation in the FIR has refused to release the same and the order has been passed in Confiscation Case no. 18/09 by the Collector, Gaya. The same is also impugned. He submits that the total quantity of what that was seized is 128.50 quintals in 259 bags whereas the total quantity of wheat that was released in favour of four dealers as per FIR itself is 138.10 quintals of rice. He further submits that apart from two bags , none of the bags seized bear Food Corporation of India marking. He further submits that so far as wheat is concerned, there is neither any provision of licensing of the trade nor any restriction on storage thereof nor any movement restriction and merely on suspicion and surmises , the allegation has been made and the FIR lodged. Be that as it may, I am not inclined to go into all those questions at this stage. 3 As truck is a commercial commodity and no useful purpose would be served by keeping its detention, I direct the learned C.J.M.,Gaya to release the same to the petitioner on furnishing security to his satisfaction. The release would be subject to the result of the criminal case and the confiscation proceeding in relation thereto, if any. So far as wheat is concerned, I direct District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Gaya , to release the same to the petitioner on petitioner’s furnishing security to his satisfaction, which shall be subject to the result of the confiscation proceeding and the criminal case in relation thereto. The Collector would pass orders in this regard within fifteen days from the date of production of a copy of this order before him. The Court and/or the Collector,Gaya would not insist on either cash security or the Bank Guarantee for the purpose of release, as ordered aforesaid. This disposes the writ petitions. Let a copy of this order be sent to learned C.J.M, Gaya and the District Magistrate-cum- Collector , Gaya, by FAX, at the cost of the petitioner. Singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)