APHC010006872019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] FRIDAY, THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 74/2019 Between: 1. B.V.SUBBA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O DR. NO.30-16-21, V.M.RANG RAO STREET, SEETHARAMAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI. 2. THE COLLECTOR, KRISHNA AT MACHILIPATNAM. 3. THE U D CHECKING INSPECTOR, O/O THE ASST. SUPPLY OFFICER CIRCLE-I AREA,VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DIST. ...RESPONDENT(S): Revision filed under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the judgment in EC Appeal No.209 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Prl. Sessions Judge, Krishna Division at Machilipatnam, dated 05.10.2018 in conforming the orders in ECP No.26 of 2013 on the file of the Collector (CS), Krishna District at Machilipatnam dated 15.06.2018 for the amount of confiscation is reduced to 50 percent form 100 percent and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copy of ECP No.26 of 2013 on the file of the Collector (CS), Krishna District at Machilipatnam, dated 15.06.2018 the present and to pas. IA NO: 2 OF 2019 -2- CRL.R.C. No.74 of 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Suspend the operation of the judgment in Judgment in EC Appeal No.209 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Prl. Sessions Judge, Krishna Division at Machilipatnam, dated 05.10.2018 in conforming the orders in ECP No.26 of 2013 on the file of the Collector (CS), Krishna Dist at Machilipatnam dated 15.06.2018 for the amount of confiscation is reduced to 50 percent pending disposal of the Criminal petition and to pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. YADAVALLI BALA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: 1. In spite of the matter is being listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, none appears on behalf of the petitioner. 2. The instant criminal revision case, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed against the judgment dated 05.10.2018, passed by the Sessions Judge, Krishna Division at Machilipatnam District, in Crl.A.No.209 of 2018, whereby learned Sessions Judge confirmed the judgment dt.15.06.2018 passed by the Collector (CS), Krishna District at Machilipatnam, in E.C.P. No.26 of 2013. 3. Brief fact of the matter is that, on receipt of credible information, the UD Checking Inspector, along with the Vigilance and Enforcement Officers, Vijayawada, proceeded to Bhanunagar area at about 2.00 PM on 20.02.2013 and inspected the business premises of the petitioner, where they found certain contraventions of the Control Order by the petitioner while performing the business, thereby seized the entire stock of rice. -3- CRL.R.C. No.74 of 2019 Thereafter, the said UD Inspector (complainant) filed a petition under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act against the petitioner before the Collector. The Collector, by passing an order dated 15.06.2018, in exercise of the power conferred under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, ordered for confiscation of 100% of the seized stock to the Government from the present petitioner. The impugned order of confiscation was under challenge before learned Sessions Judge in E.C. Appeal No.209 of 2008. 4. The learned Sessions Judge heard the parties and confirmed the order passed by the Collector dated 15.06.2018, but reduced the percentage of confiscation of the seized stock from 100% to 50%. Hence, this revision. 5. I have gone through the order of confiscation passed by the Collector and also perused the observations of learned Sessions Judge while deciding the E.C. Appeal. It appears that learned Sessions Judge, following the procedure established under law in deciding the issue, is of the opinion that the petitioner has contravened Clause 18(3)(c) of the Dealers Order, 2008. I also find justification in reducing the percentage of confiscation of the seized stock from 100% to 50%. 6. On a thorough perusal of the impugned order, I find nothing regarding any illegality or impropriety in the impugned order. Thus, the instant revision case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. -4- CRL.R.C. No.74 of 2019 7. Under the above observation, the instant criminal revision case is dismissed as devoid of merit. The order of suspension of impugned order passed by this Court during the pendency of the instant criminal revision case is hereby vacated. The petitioner is directed to comply with the order passed by learned Sessions Judge within six weeks from the date of receiving a copy of this order by the petitioner, failing which the Collector shall take necessary steps against the petitioner, in accordance with the provisions of law. State shall intimate the order to the petitioner forthwith. 8. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA Date:07.08.2026 BV