Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM HARAKH JAISWAL versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. FOOD & CIVIL SUPLIES & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Harakh Jaiswal v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Food & Civil Suplies & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 29262 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2357 (5 September 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 36

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.29262 of 2005

Ram Harakh Jaisawal    Vs.      State of U.P. and others

         ........

Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli J.

Hon'ble Vikram Nath J.

On 16.5.2005 Standing Counsel was granted time to obtain instruction. Again on 18.8.2005 Standing Counsel was granted time to obtain instruction as to under which law the petitioner's food grains had been seized. Learned Standing Counsel has produced before us a letter dated 25.5.2005 sent to Sri C.K. Rai Standing Counsel by District Magistrate, Gorakhpur which contains nothing of relevance and merely shows that inquiry was going on. Another letter by the same District Magistrate, Gorakhpur dated 26.8.2005 enclosing an inquiry report dated 25.5.2005 by the District Food Marketing Officer, Gorakhpur has also been produced.

We have examined this report of District Food Marketing Officer dated 25.8.2005. According to that report the purchase and dispatch of the food grains  by the petitioner has been entered into the record and is covered by the Gate pass 9-R issued by concerned Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti.

Thus prima facie the petitioner has not committed any offence. However, the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur still appear to be persisting on the inquiry.

In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the food grains which is perishable commodity which has been seized is admittedly of the petitioner should be  immediately released to the petitioner, upon the petitioner furnishing security other than cash or bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur. If ultimately the petitioner is found to have committed an offence or have violated some law, the penalty may be recovered from the petitioner from the security furnished by him.

It may be mentioned here that the letter of District Magistrate dated 26.8.2005 and its accompanying report dated 25.8.2005 are being retained on record of this case.

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions.

Dt.5.9.2005

Hsc/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.