Raghavendra Agro Tech vs. The State Of Ap
Held
The Court directed the release of the seized stock in favour of the petitioner on the condition of furnishing personal or third-party immovable property as security equivalent to the value of the seized stock within six weeks. The Court also directed the Joint Collector (2nd respondent) to conduct a detailed enquiry as contemplated under Rule 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act as early as possible, preferably within six weeks. This decision was made in light of a previous order by a Division Bench of the same High Court in 'Onteru Bhaskar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh'. The Court found it appropriate and reasonable to impose conditions for release to protect the respondents' interest pending the final disposal of the 6-A proceedings.
Facts
The petitioner, manager of a firm owned by his younger brother, sold 430 bags (209.80 quintals) of raw rice to PRS Agro Tech, Bangarpet. The rice was purchased from farmers. While transporting the rice on July 4, 2023, the vehicle was intercepted by respondents 3 and 4. The vehicle and the rice were seized under a panchanama, with the authorities alleging the rice was PDS rice procured from cardholders and being illegally sold. A crime was registered in FIR No. 106/2023 at Orvakal Town Police Station, Kurnool District. The petitioner filed this writ petition aggrieved by the seizure and FIR.
Key Issues
1. Whether the seized stock of rice should be released in favour of the petitioner pending disposal of the 6-A proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the seized rice was legally purchased from farmers and intended for sale to PRS Agro Tech. The seizure and FIR were unjustified. Revenue/State's contention: The revenue/State contended that the rice was PDS rice being illegally sold, justifying the seizure and registration of the crime. The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the revenue/State beyond the basis for the seizure and FIR.
Sections Cited
Rule 6-A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.17535 of 2023
ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and perused the material available on record. 2) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the manager of the firm which is owned by the petitioner’s younger brother. The petitioner firm sold 430 Bags of raw Rice admeasuring 209.80 quintals to PRS Agro Tech, Bangarpet. The petitioner firm purchased the said rice from the farmers. While, the petitioner was transporting the 430 bags of Raw Rice to PRS Agro Tech, Bangarpet. On 04.07.2023, respondent Nos.3 and 4 intercepted the vehicle and seized the subject vehicle along with 430 bags of Rice admeasuring 209.80 quintals under the cover of panchanama dated 04.07.2023. By stating that the said rice is PDS Rice procured from card holders and same is being illegally sold in Bangalore town and registered a Crime in FIR No.106/2023 dated 04.07.2023, on the file of the Orvakal
2
Town, Police Station, Kurnool District. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3) However, considering the facts
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.