Pintu Kumar Singh vs State Of Bihar And Ors

The petitioner seeks a direction for release of 173 qunitals and 50 kilograms of rice seized in connection with Belhar P.S. Case No. 300 of 2019 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. A confiscation case also has been initiated vide Confiscation Case No. 342/2019-20.

The prayer of the petitioner, under the aforesaid circumstances, is that till the conclusion of the proceeding, the food-grains ought not to be sold as it would create further complications in case it is found that the seized commodity was not liable to be confiscated. Alternatively, the learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for a direction to release the food-grains till the conclusion of the proceedings.

The first prayer is with respect to apprehension of complication arising out of a situation where the food-grains are not confiscated. The aforesaid apprehension is misconceived as even if the food-grains are sold during the pendency of the confiscating proceedings, subject to the decision making of the District Magistrate- Cum-Collector in that regard and if no confiscation is ultimately passed by the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, the petitioner shall be paid the value thereof.

The alternative prayer of the petitioner also is not fit to be allowed for the reason that no such order could be passed in the event of the confiscation proceeding having been initiated.

All that this Court can direct in the present circumstance is to conclude the proceedings expeditiously, without any delay, and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner but within a time schedule, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a coy of this order.

In case, the proceedings are not concluded, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector to release the food-grains, if it has not already been sold during that period.

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.