Rajkumar Enterprises, Balasore vs. State Of Odisha

1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Admit.

This Criminal Revision has been filed challenging the order dated 21.04.2026 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. (Rural), Balasore dismissing the Criminal Misc. Case No.179 of 2025 arising out of C.T. Case No.883 of 2025, whereby the learned J.M.F.C. (Rural), Balasore rejected the prayer for release of 665 bags of betel nuts.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, there are materials on record to indicate that there is no dispute regarding the ownership of the betel nuts, in as much as, though the proprietorship was not “active at the time of transaction of betel nuts” as in terms of the letter received from the Department of CT & GST Enforcement Unit, Balasore, the penalty of Rs. 6,98,250/- has been collected from the consignor and the receipt of the payment of penalty is on record at Annexure-7, which indicates the name of the Petitioner.

Referring to the same, it is submitted that the report of the Investigating Agency, which forms part of the impugned order indicates that “ the seized betel nuts are not necessary for the on-going investigation”

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned order rejecting his prayer for release of 665 bags of betel nuts is liable to be interfered with.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that the since the matter is under investigation, the prayer of the Petitioner ought not to be entertained at this stage.

Considering the rival submissions, the stand of the Investigating Agency as noted hereinabove and the GST payment receipt, this Court is persuaded to hold that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vrs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 290, no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution, if the 665 bags of betel nuts are released in favour of the Petitioner and such release is circumscribed with suitable conditions so as to ensure that there is a fair trial in the event final form in the nature of charge sheet is filed in the case at hand.

Hence, this Court directs that 660 bags of betel nuts (out of 665 bags so seized) shall be released in favour of the Petitioner on his furnishing cash security of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs) and unencumbered property security matching the value as reflected in the GST receipt.

The amount of cash security so deposited shall be kept in an interest bearing account. The “Securities” so furnished shall abide by the final outcome of the lis.

Accordingly, the CRLREV stands disposed of.