Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38549 (ALL)

ATUL GUPTA v. STATE OF U.P.

CRLR/3870/2023 · 2025-07-13

Sameer Jain

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112954 Reserved on-03.07.2025 Delivered on-14.07.2025 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3870 of 2023 Revisionist :- Atul Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Kuldeep Kumar,Rajiv Lochan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla and Sri Kuldeep Kumar, learned counsels for the revisionist and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant revision U/s 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred to set aside the judgment and order dated 13.07.2023 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No. 14 /Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act), Bulandshahr in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2023 (Atul Gupta Vs. State of U.P.) and order dated dated 23.03.2023 passed by Collector/District Magistrate, Bulandshahr in Case No. 216 of 2023 (State Vs. Atula Gupta and others) Computerized Case No. D202311170000216, under Section 6A U.P. Essential Commodities Act, 1995 and to release the Vehicle No. U.P. 13 K 8438 (Splendor Plus) having Chassis No. 05D16F17665 and Engine No. 05D15E18197, in favour of the revisionist. 3. Learned counsels for the revisionist submitted that as per allegation, revisionist indulged in black-marketing of rice and in the alleged black-marketing of rice his motorcycle bearing registration no. U.P. 13 K 8438 was also being used and, therefore, on the application moved by the authority concerned, D.M. Bulandshahr confiscated his motorcycle vide order dated 23.03.2023 and thereafter when he preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge then on 13.07.2023 his appeal was also dismissed but both the impugned orders are illegal. 4. They further submitted that there is no evidence that the alleged recovered rice belong to government scheme. 5. They further submitted that even from the FIR of the present case, it reflects, when during search, it was revealed that the alleged rice belonged to Arniya Godown and thereafter when godown was checked then inventory of the godown was found correct. 6. They further submitted that even during investigation, it could not be found that the alleged recovered rice was being stored in violation of any control order. They further submitted that therefore, motorcycle of the revisionist could not be confiscated and therefore, both the impugned orders are illegal and are liable to be set aside and motorcycle of the revisionist be released in his favour. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer of revisionist and submitted that motorcycle of the revisionist was being used in black- marketing of alleged recovered rice but could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence that the alleged recovered rice belonged to government scheme and there is also no evidence that revisionist violated any control order. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, as per allegation, revisionist indulged in black-marketing of essential commodity (rice) and his motorcycle was also being used for the same but there is no evidence on record, which can suggest that revisionist violated any control order as from the record, it could not be reflected that alleged recovered rice belonged to any government scheme. The Apex Court in case of Kailash Prasad Yadav and another Vs. State of Jharkhand and another AIR 2007 SC 2626, observed that if there is no violation of any control order made under Section 3 E.C. Act then no confiscation order can be passed. 10. It appears, while passing the impugned orders neither D.M. concerned, who confiscated the motorcycle of the revisionist nor appellate court consider above legal aspect and, therefore, they committed gross illegality. 11. Therefore, both the impugned orders dated 23.03.2023 and 13.07.2023 are illegal and are hereby set aside. 12. For release of his motorcycle revisionist may file release application before competent authority. 13. Accordingly, the instant revision stands partly allowed. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 KK Patel 2 of 2 Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad