MENUR MADHAVA KAMATH Vs. STATE OF MYSORE
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MENUR MADHAVA KAMATH
STATE OF MYSORE
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)On February 26. 1968 at, about 5 p.m. 125 bags of rice were seized near Narasimharaiapura in the district of Chikmagalur by the food staff of the office of the Deputy Commissioner of that district from two persons Naik and Prabhu who were transporting it. On March 1, 1968 Naik and Prabhu from whom the rice had been so seized made an application to the Deputy Commissioner for the return of the seized rice to them and their allegation. was that they were the agents of the three petitioners before me to whom, according to them, the rice belonged. The Deputy Commissioner issued a notice to Naik and Prabhu asking them to appear before him on March 5, 1968 with respect to the application so made to him, and after hearing them on that day. he made an order on March R, 1968 confiscating the rice which had been seized as mentioned above Although he did not sav so in so manv words, it is clear that this order of confiscation was made by him under Sec.6A of the Essential Commodities; Act. 1955 (Central Act 10 of 1955), and that that is so was not disputed by Mr.Havanur appearing for the State.
(2.)The Deputy Commissioner made the order of confiscation on the basis of his conclusion that there was a contravention of an order made under Section 3 of that Act. Section 6A reads : Where any foodgrains, edible oilseeds or edible oils are seized In pursuance of an order made under S. 3 in relation thereto, they may be produced, without anv unreasonable delay, before the Collector of the district or the Presidency town in which such foodgrains, edible oilseeds or edible oils are seized and whether or not a prosecution is instituted for the contravention of such order, the Collector, if satisfied that there has been a contravention of the order, may order confiscation of the foodgrains, edible oilseeds or edible oils: Provided that without prejudice to any action which may be taken under any other provision of this Act, no foodgrains or edible oilseeds seized in pursuance of an order made under Sec.3 in relating thereto from a producer shall, if the seized foodgrains or edible oilseeds have been produced by him, be confiscated under this section.
(3.)The complaint made in this revision petition presented by the three petitioners, who, according to Naik and Prabhu from whom the rice was seized, are their principals, is that the order of confiscation made by the Deputy Commissioner was not preceded by the issue of a show cause notice directed by S. 6B of the Essential Commodities Act , 1956 which reads:
"No order confiscating any foodgrains, edible oilseeds or edible oils shall be made under S 6A unless the owner of such articles or the person from whom they are seized- (a) is given a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on which it is proposed to cofiscate the articles; (b) is given an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the grounds of confiscation; and (c) is given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter."
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.