IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.881 of 2008 1. NAKUL PRASAD, S/o. Kishori Prasad, Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Marketing Officer, Gaya. WITH CR. WJC No.1186 of 2008 1. PINTU KUMAR, s/O. Bhola Lal Barnwal @ Bhola Nath Barnwal, 2. Basudeo Thakur, S/o. Ganauri Sharma, Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. The Block Supply Officer, Imamganj, Gaya. Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr.Adv. Mr. D.N. Tiwari, Mr. Saket Tiwary, Advs. Counsel for the State: Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojah, A.C. to G.A.-7, Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, A.C. to S.C. 12. ----------- 04. 18.08.2009 Cr.W.J.C. No.881 of 2008 and Cr. W.J.C. No.1186 of 2008 due to related facts being common so both these applications have been heard and are being disposed of with this common order. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. So far Cr.W.J.C. No.881 of 2008 is concerned, F.I.R. is under Section 7 of the E.C. Act against the petitioner Nakul Prasad with the allegation that 98 bags of wheat, each bag containing 50 Kg stored in his godown and 50 bags each containing 50 Kg, loaded on a pick-up Van parked in the mill premises of the petitioner was recovered. As per the seizure list (Annexure-1) bags bore 2 F.C.I. marks and were sewen by hands was recovered. It is submitted that a confiscation proceeding is going on with regard to the recovered wheat. It is also submitted that in course of proceeding the wheat has been sold and the sale proceeds lay deposited in the treasury. As regards Cr.W.J.C. No.1186 of 2008, the F.I.R. is under section 7 of E.C. Act against the petitioners and the allegation is that 71 bags of rice and 21 bags of wheat each containing 50 Kg and the bags bearing F.C.I. marks and hand sewen was recovered from the residence-cum-shop of petitioner Basudeo Thakur. Similarly confiscation proceeding is going on with regard to the seized wheat and rice. It is submitted that the articles have also been sold and the sale proceeds is deposited in the treasury. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged under Section 7 of the E.C. Act. It was further submitted that Section 7 of the E.C. Act provides for punishment for violation of the provisions of any of the orders under Section 3 of the E.C. Act. It is submitted that it is not shown as to which specific order has been violated. Learned counsel referred to an order dated 30.10.1991 of this court passed in Cr.W.J.C. No.460 of 1991, wherein this Court in a similar case directed for release of the seized food grains on 3 furnishing bond with sureties to the satisfaction of the Collector concerned. In the case of Nandu Sah V. State of Bihar reported in 1984 P.L.J.R. 156, this Court has ordered for release of confiscated goods seized for the alleged contravention of an order during the pendency of a criminal case and in case the confiscated goods have been sold then the sale proceeds. Vide order dated 08.01.2008 in Cr.W.J.C. No.7567 of 2007 this Court has also taken similar view for releasing the sale proceeds of the confiscated food grains during the pendency of the criminal proceeding. Thus hearing and without expressing any opinion about the merits of the case, the sale proceeds of the seized food-grains is ordered to be released to the respective claimants namely, Nakul Prasad in Cr. .W.J.C. No.881 of 2008 and Basudeo Thakur in Cr.W.J.C. No.1186 of 2008 on furnishing bond with sureties to the satisfaction of the Collector concerned. The release of the articles pursuant to this order will not be permitted to be taken as a ground for challenging the validity of the confiscation proceeding. These two applications are accordingly allowed. Mkr. (C.M. Prasad, J.)