Supreme Court upholds confiscation order, dismisses appeal, and drops criminal proceedings due to delay

The Supreme Court upheld the order of confiscation passed by the Collector, dismissed the appeal, and directed to drop the criminal proceedings against the appellant due to the lack of progress and the extended period since the alleged offense.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether the samples taken from the bags of Khandsari were representative samples.
2. Whether the order of confiscation passed by the Collector was justified under the Licensing Order.
3. Whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant should be dropped.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The main issue in this case revolved around the question of whether the samples taken from the bags of Khandsari were representative samples. The appellant argued that only two samples each from three bags out of a total of 80 bags were taken, and this was insufficient to prove that the entire stock contained more than 90% Sucrose. However, the court found that the samples were taken in the presence of the proprietor, and the public analyst confirmed that all three samples contained more than 90% Sucrose. It was also noted that the appellant did not raise any objections at the time of sampling. The court distinguished a previous judgment where the circumstances were different, and upheld the Collector's decision that there were more than 10 quintals of Khandsari violating the Licensing Order.

Issue 2:
Regarding the justification of the order of confiscation passed by the Collector, it was established that 80 quintals of Khandsari were found in the premises, exceeding the limit allowed without a license. The Licensing Order defined sugar as containing more than 90% Sucrose, and the public analyst confirmed this in the samples taken. Therefore, the court concluded that the Collector had sufficient grounds to believe there was a violation of the Licensing Order, justifying the order of confiscation.

Issue 3:
Lastly, the court addressed the issue of the criminal proceedings against the appellant. It was noted that despite the pending prosecution, no significant progress had been made in the case over a period of more than 10 years. Considering the lack of progress and the time elapsed, the court deemed it against the interest of justice to continue the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the court directed to drop the criminal proceedings against the appellant.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the order of confiscation passed by the Collector, dismissed the appeal, and directed to drop the criminal proceedings against the appellant due to the lack of progress and the extended period since the alleged offense.

---