Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52098 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24833 of 2024 Applicant :- Vishnu Kumar Saini Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Agarval Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Ankit Agarwal, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The instant application has been filed with the prayer to allow this application and set aside the impugned order dated 14.05.2024 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bulandshahr in Criminal Case No. 1667 of 2021, (State of U.P. Vs. M/s. Gold Shan Bhog Aata Flour Meal (Proprietor) owner Vishnu Kumar), under section 6A of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 3. The factual matrix of the case in brief are that on 21.06.2021, District Supply Officer, Bulandshahr led a raid alongwith Tehsildar (Judicial), Khurja, Supply Inspector and Police Officials on the directions of U.P. Zila Adhikhari, Khurja at 4:30 p.m. and found that illegal sell and purchase of food grains of Public Distribution System/Mid Day Meal was being carried out there. The Proprietor of the said flour mill Vishnu Kumar Saini and his brother Narendra Kumar Saini were found there, who produced the license of flour mill and documents relating to G.S.T., as many as 400 sacks were found in disarranged manner on the floor of said flour mill. Apart from the same, 180 quintal of wheat and 3 quintal of rice kept in five sacks were also found there. These sacks were tied by handmade thread. Apart from that, 6 sacks, the opening thereof was sealed by Government stitches were found at the flour mill. At that time Mrs. Neeraj Goswami, a Primary School Teacher was present at the spot, who could not give any plausible explanation for the same and stated that she had come there to return said wheat, as the wheat was allotted by the Government, under Mid Day Meal Scheme in lieu of 'Atta', borrowed by school from said flour mill. 4. Subsequently, the first Information Report was lodged on 22.06.2021, thereafter on the basis whereof the proceedings were initiated under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, which led to the confiscation of the food grains. The applicant challenged this confiscation before this Court by filing a Criminal Revision, bearing No. 4752 of 2022, in which this Court, vide order dated 08.11.2023 directed the competent authority/ADM (Administration), Bulandshahar to release the seized food grains in the present matter from the flour mill of the revisionist with certain conditions. However, the Additional District Magistrate (Administration) rejected the application of the applicant for the release of the food grains, leading to the present application under Section 482 CrPC. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order dated 14.05.2024 is legally unsustainable in the eye of law. It is contended that the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bulandshahr, incorrectly interpreted the order dated 2nd July 2022, passed by the District Magistrate, Bulandshahar, which pertained solely to the opening of the seal of the applicant's flour mill and not to the release of the food grains. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the delivery deed (Supurdginama) relied upon by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bulandshahr) is a forged document. 7. This court has carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material on records. The pivotal question that arises for determination is whether the impugned order warrants interference in the exercise of Court's inherent power under section 482 Cr.P.C. 8. In the present case the applicant's grievances essentially revolves around disputed question of fact, specially, whether the food grains were released to the applicant. The Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bulandshahr has arrived at a factual finding that the food grains were released, based on the delivery deed (Supurdginama). The applicant disputes this finding, alleging forgery. 9. The applicant has alternative and efficacious remedy available under the Code of Criminal Procedure and other relevant laws to establish the factual claims and challenge the veracity of the delivery deed (Supurdginama). 10. The fact that a closure report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C was submitted and no order has been passed by the learned Magistrate, is also a matter that does not warrant interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C at this stage. 11. In view of the foregoing analysis and reasoning, this court is of the considered opinion that no justifiable ground exists to invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The application, devoid on merits and is liable to be dismissed. 12. Accordingly, the instant application is hereby dismissed. 13. However, it is made clear that applicant is at liberty to avail other remedy available under the law to agitate his grievance. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad