Judgment Satyeshwar Roy, J. 1. By this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing order dated 19.4.1980 passed by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Vaghmara, by which it has taken cognizance of an offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (the E.C. Act) and under Sec.201 of the Indian Penal Code (the Penal Code) and directed for issuing processes against the petitioners, 2. The officer-in-charge, Muri G.R.P.S. came to the Bakaro Steel City Railway Station in course of investigation of a case and found that coal loaded in wagons were being sent from Bakaro Goods Shade. Upon enquiry, the owners of the said coal did not come forward. No licence was produced by any of the persons to whom the coal loaded in wagons belonged. There was violation of Clauses 3, 8, 11 and 12 of the Bihar Coal Control Order 1956 (The Order) and therefore, punishable under Section 7 of the E.C. Act. He on the basis of the information lodged by himself drew up a first information report and took up the investigation. He directed the Railway Superintendent of Bokaro Steel City not to allow the wagons to move. After completion of the investigation charge sheet was submitted and as stated earlier cognizance was taken against the petitioner. 3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have violated none of the provisions of the Order and therefore, Section 7 of the E.C. Act was not attracted. It was also contended that the wagons were moved after they obtained order in writing from the Officer-in-charge of the Muri G. R. P. S. It was further contended that there was no valid seizure of the coal in question and, therefore, Sec.201 of the Penal Code was also not attracted. 4. It appears from the record of the Court below that when wagons were allowed to move from the Bokaro Steel City Railway Station the Officer In-charge filed an application in the Court below for prosecution of some of the Railway Officers of the Station on the ground that they have allowed the wagons to move without obtaining permission of the Court. The matter was contested by the concerned Railway servants and by an order dated 23.2.1979 the Court below held that there was no valid seizure of the coal and, therefore, no prior permission of the Court was necessary. The matter was contested by the concerned Railway servants and by an order dated 23.2.1979 the Court below held that there was no valid seizure of the coal and, therefore, no prior permission of the Court was necessary. Apart from that it appears from Annexure-4 series that the Officer-in-charge has stated that the petitioners had produced their licence under the Order and other relevant papers. He therefore, informed the Railway Officers that the wagons might be allowed to move. All the wagons were booked for destination outside the State of Bihar. Clause 11 of the Order prohibits transfer of coal, except under permit, from any place of a district to any other place outside the district. This clause, therefore, restricts the transportation of coal within the State of Bihar. Moreover, nothing has been brought to my notice to show that any previous permission of the State Government is necessary for transferring coal from this State to a destination outside the State. It has already been noticed that the Court below has held that the seizure was illegal. In such a situation, it cannot be said that either Section 7 of the E. C. Act or Sec.201 of the Penal Code is attracted to the facts of the present case. 5. In the result, the application is allowed so far the petitioners are concerned and the cognizance taken by the Court below against the petitioners in C. R. Case No. 2368 of 1978 [Muri Rail P. S. Case No. 1(12) 78] is quashed.