K. L. SHRIVASTAVA, J. ( 1 ) THIS revision petition is against the order dated 5/3/1983 passed by the Sessions Judge, Indore in Criminal Case No. 80 of 1984 whereby it has been directed that charge under section 7 (I) (a) (ii) read with section 3 (2) (i) of the Essential Commodities Actt 1955 (for short the Act) for not exhibiting the price list of oil as defined in Clause 2 (c) of the M. P. Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel Oil (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 (for short the Ordert) containing opening balance and the price, has to be framed. ( 2 ) CIRCUMSTANCES giving rise to this revision petition are these. The petitioner Tara Chand holds licence for sale of oil which according to the definition means motor spirit and high speed diesel oil. He runs his business under the name and style of United Alito Service, Rail district Indore. The other petitioner Yusufali is the salesman employed by him. On 3. 5. 1982, the Assistant Food Officer Indore, on inspection found that (1) stock register was not filled after 1/5/1982 (2) no sale register was maintained, (3) on meter reading 34 litres of diesel was found in excess and (4) bills were issued on 3. 5. 82 for adjustment of the stock. ( 3 ) ON the aforesaid allegations a report was lodged with the police which has, on 196. 84 prosecuted the applicants in respect of the offence under section 3/7 of the Act. ( 4 ) THE learned Sessions Judge trying the case passed the impugned order. ( 5 ) THE contention of the petitionerts learned counsel in the court of Session was that the allegations do not constitute any offence and at any rate the offence against the petitioners falls under section 7 (1) (a) (i) of the Act which is punishable with imprisonment for a term of one year and the prosecution launched on 19. 6. 84 is time barred in view of the provision embodied in section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short Tthe Codet ). ( 6 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution the allegations against the petitioners constitute offence under section 7 (1) (a) (i) of the Act which is punishable with imprisonment for ten years and the prosecution is not time barred. ( 6 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution the allegations against the petitioners constitute offence under section 7 (1) (a) (i) of the Act which is punishable with imprisonment for ten years and the prosecution is not time barred. ( 7 ) THE learned Sessions Judge has prima facie found that price list with opening balance was not exhibited as required by Clause 3 (1) of the Order and thereby offence punishable under section 7 (1) (a) (ii)of the Act appears to have been committed. ( 8 ) THE point for consideration is whether the revision petition deserves to be allowed. ( 9 ) IN exercise of the powers under section 3 of the Act, with the object of maintaining supplies and securing availability of oil at fair price, the State Government of M. P. made the Order referred to above. In section 2 (c) of the Order oilt is defined as under: TTOii means any of the Oil specified below: Motor spirit; of high speed diesel oil Prior to the inspection dated 3. 5. 82 the Order was amended vide notification No. 2782-6870-XXIX- (2)-82 dated 15/4/1982. Amended sub Clause (4) of Clause 3 reads as under: Every dealer shall maintain true and correct accounts of purchase, sale and storage or oil at his business premises, to be written up within two days (excluding holidays) from the date; of transition, showing: the opening stock of the day; the quantity received during the day; the quantity sold, delivered or other wise; the closing stock of the day; and such other particulars as an Authorised officer may, by order in writing, specify. TI( 10 ) CLAUSE 4 of the Order provides for issue of licence in Form-B and by the aforesaid amendment, condition 3 (iii) of the licence is in these words: The licensee shall complete his accounts for each day within two days (excluding holiday) from the date of transaction, unless prevented by reasonable cause the burden of proving which shall be upon him. ( 11 ) IT has not been disputed that accounts in respect of 1/5/1982 were duly filled in and that 2. 582 was a holiday and there is no question of any transaction on that date. The petitionerst learned counsel, with reference to the aforesaid provisions rightly contends that under the Order, transaction dated 3. 5. ( 11 ) IT has not been disputed that accounts in respect of 1/5/1982 were duly filled in and that 2. 582 was a holiday and there is no question of any transaction on that date. The petitionerst learned counsel, with reference to the aforesaid provisions rightly contends that under the Order, transaction dated 3. 5. 82 could be entered in the account registers within two days thereof and, therefore, On inspection done in the evening of 3. 5. 82 absence of entries relating to the transaction of days after 1. 5. 82 does not constitute a case of contravention of the condition of licence or of the provision regarding maintaining true and correct account. ( 12 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioners next contends and rightly that cognizance of offences under the Act can only be taken as provided by section II of the Act and as in the report by the police it has no where been stated that price list was not displayed. The learned Sessions Judge has erred in passing the impugned order regarding framing of charge in relation to price list. ( 13 ) AT this stage the provision in section 11 of the Act may be reproduced. It reads thus: No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act except on a report in writing of the facts constituting such offence made by a person who is a public servant as defined in section 21 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ). A plain perusal of the provision reveals that written report of the facts constituting the offence constitutes a pre-condition for cognizance being taken and as in the instant case the fact that price list was not exhibited does not find mention in the report, cognizance in respect of that offence could not be taken by the learned Sessions Judge. ( 14 ) HOWEVER in the instant case it is in the report that no sale register was maintained. This allegation in the context of facts may prima facie be held as referring to the registers regarding sale of motor spirit as well as high speed diesel oil and the contention that in the absence of express statement about sale register in respect of high speed diesel oil it cannot be construed as referring to it, has no force. This allegation in the context of facts may prima facie be held as referring to the registers regarding sale of motor spirit as well as high speed diesel oil and the contention that in the absence of express statement about sale register in respect of high speed diesel oil it cannot be construed as referring to it, has no force. ( 15 ) FOR the relevant provisions in regard to sale register, reference has to be made to the amendment referred to in paragraph 10 above. By the aforesaid amendment condition No. 3 of the licence has been substituted and it has been provided that maintenance of sale register (as distinguished from stock register) shall not be necessary by the licensee of motor spirit. It may be noted that according to the condition sale register in respect of high speed diesel oil has to be maintained. ( 16 ) THE contention of the petitioner learned counsel that contravention of condition of licence cannot be punished as constituting contravention of the Order is without merit as is - clear from a plain perusal of Clause 4 (1) of the Order. It reads as under: Licensing of Dealer (1) No person shall carryon business as a dealer in oil except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Licence issued in this behalf by the Licensing Authority. From the foregoing discussion it is clear that omission to maintain sale register in respect of high speed diesel oil does constitute con, prevention of the condition of licence and; therefore, of the Order under which the licence is issued. ( 17 ) PETITIONERS learned counsel next urges that assuming that omission to maintain sale register in respect of high speed diesel oil constitutes contravention of the Order, the Order itself having been made in relation to Section 3 (2) (h) and (i) of the Act, the resulting offence attracts the applicability of the penal provision embodied in Section 7 (1) (a) (i) and not of the one under section 7 (1) (a) (ij) of the Act and the prosecution is time barred. ( 18 ) IN order to properly appreciate the contention, the aforesaid provisions in section 7 may usefully be reproduced. ( 18 ) IN order to properly appreciate the contention, the aforesaid provisions in section 7 may usefully be reproduced. They run thus: 7 (1) If any person contravenes any order made under section 3 (a) he shall be punishable in the case of an order made with reference to CI. (h) or CI. (J) of sub-section (2) of that section, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and shall also be liable to fine, and in the case of any other order, with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months But which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. Section 3 (1) of the Act reads thus Powers to control production, supply, distribution, etc of essential commodities. The Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices or for securing any essential commodity for the defence of India or the efficient conduct of military operations, it may, by order provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein. Sub-section (2) has various Clause and lays down that without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by sub-section (1), an order made there under may provide for various matters such as regulating production or manufacture of any essential commodity and it storage, transport, distribution, disposal and sale including price control. Clause (h) is in these terms: For collecting any information or statistics with a view to regulating or prohibiting any of the aforesaid matters. Clause (j) relates to provision regarding incidential and supplementary matters including entries, search and examination of premises and conveyances etc. ( 19 ) THE correctness of the aforesaid contention canvassed by the petitioner learned counsel has to be determined with reference to the object behind the making of the Order. Clause (j) relates to provision regarding incidential and supplementary matters including entries, search and examination of premises and conveyances etc. ( 19 ) THE correctness of the aforesaid contention canvassed by the petitioner learned counsel has to be determined with reference to the object behind the making of the Order. ( 20 ) IN making of the Order the State Government has expressed itself thus Whereas the State Government is of opinion that it is necessary and expedient so to do for maintaining supplies and for securing availability at fair prices of motor spirit and high speed diesel oil in the State of M. P. T ( 21 ) FROM the foregoing, it is clear that the Order has been made with reference to section 3 (2) (h) of the Act and, therefore, the contention as to the applicability of the penal provision in section 7 (1) (a) (i) is well-merited and must prevail. ( 22 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners now referring to the provision in section 468 (2) of the Code regarding limitation urges that the present prosecution launched on 19. 6. 84 for the offence under section 7 (l) (a) (i) of the Act which is punishable only with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, being beyond one-year of the date of commission of the offence, is clearly barred under the aforesaid provisions of the Code and. deserves to be quashed. The relevant provision of the Code referred to above is in these terms: 468. Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation. The period of limitation shall be Six months, if the offence is punishable with fine only; one year, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year: three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year But not exceeding three years. ( 23 ) IT is true that section 470 of the Code provides for exclusion of time in certain cases. However, there appears to be no case for applying this provision. It must, therefore, be held that the contention as to the limitation has force and must also be permitted to prevail. ( 23 ) IT is true that section 470 of the Code provides for exclusion of time in certain cases. However, there appears to be no case for applying this provision. It must, therefore, be held that the contention as to the limitation has force and must also be permitted to prevail. ( 24 ) IN the ultimate analysis as a result of the foregoing discussion, it is clear that for reasons more than one the impugned order cannot be allowed to stand and it must be set aside. ( 25 ) IN the result, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the aforesaid proceedings in Criminal Case No. 80 of 1984 initiated against the petitioners are quashed. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged. .