Vishnu Kumar Saini vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Held

The Court allowed the criminal revision. It held that the seized food grains were not established to be part of the PDS. The District Magistrate, in a subsequent order dated July 2, 2022, had found that the matter did not come within the purview of the U.P. Essential Commodities (Sale and Distribution Control Regulation) Order, 2016, as this regulation pertains only to food grains within the PDS. The Supply Inspector also conceded that Mid Day Meal grains are not covered under the PDS for the purposes of the E.C. Act. Furthermore, no evidence linked the seized food grains to PDS or Mid Day Meal supplies, nor was there any report of theft or shortfall. The Court noted that the revisionist had filed a writ petition where the Court had directed the respondents to disclose evidence linking the goods to the Mid Day Meal Scheme. In compliance, the District Magistrate revisited the matter and found no violation of any control order. The Court also considered the closure report filed in the criminal case. Therefore, the confiscation and auction orders were deemed unsustainable. The Court directed the release of seized food grains, except for the 6 stitched sacks of wheat, upon furnishing a personal bond and surety, and if auction had occurred, the sale proceeds were to be released to the revisionist.

Facts

The revisionist, Vishnu Kumar Saini, proprietor of M/s Gold Shan Bhog Aata Flour Mill, is challenging an order confiscating food grains seized from his mill. The seizure occurred during a raid on June 21, 2021, where illegal sale and purchase of Public Distribution System (PDS) and Mid Day Meal food grains were allegedly found. The revisionist and his brother were present. Approximately 400 sacks, including wheat and rice, were found. Six sacks, sealed with government stitches, were brought by a primary school teacher, who stated they were borrowed from the mill for the Mid Day Meal scheme. A case was registered under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act (E.C. Act). The Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bulandshahr, confiscated the seized food grains. The revisionist's appeal against this order was dismissed by the Special Judge (E.C.) Act.

Key Issues

1. Whether the seized food grains from the revisionist's flour mill were established to be part of the Public Distribution System (PDS), thereby making out a case under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act (E.C. Act)? 2. Whether the show cause notice issued under Section 6-B of the E.C. Act was legally valid, specifically if it failed to specify the particular provisions of the U.P. Scheduled Commodities Distribution Order, 2004, and the U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of sale and distribution control) Order, 2016, that were allegedly violated? Contentions for the Revisionist: The learned counsel argued that it was not established that the seized food grains were from the PDS, thus no case under Section 3/7 of the E.C. Act was made out. He contended that the show cause notice was invalid for failing to specify the violated control orders, citing precedents. He also highlighted that no ration dealer reported theft, nor was there any report of shortage from the school regarding Mid Day Meal grains, and that a closure report had been filed in the criminal case. The revisionist claimed the seized food grains belonged to him and were purchased from shopkeepers. Contentions for the State: The State's arguments are not explicitly detailed in the provided text, but their position is to uphold the confiscation order.