JUDGMENT 1. - This petition is directed against the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu dated 8th November, 1989 against the charge framed against the petitioner for offence under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu on 11.5.78 by Mange Lal, Enforcement Inspector, Chirawa alleging therein that the accused petitioner, holder of Licence No. 8/Sugar/1976-77 dated 18.6.1976 for distributing of Sugar, misused 65 kgs.levy sugar by manipulating in the unit register for the months of September and October, 1976. The complaint was forwarded to the concerned police station. A case was registered under Section 3/7 of EC Act and chargesheet was filed. Charges against the accused were framed on 18.11.1989. Against that, the petitioner has filed this petition for quashing the charges. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the so called offence was committed in the year 1976 and now we are in 1992, about 16 years have elapsed and so far only charges are framed, therefore, on account of delay the charges levelled against the petitioner for the petty offences be quashed. He also drew my attention to the statement of Vithal Gopal Assistant District Supply Officer, Bundi wherein he admitted that there are cases in that Municipal area where some bogus cards are in existence but it is impossible to check them. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has shown the distribution of sugar twice against the same number of cards. Counsel for the petitioner explained that as some bogus cards were issued of same names that is why he issued the sugar against those cards also, therefore there was some double enteries in the register of distribution against the same name and number of ration cards, on this account also now no prima facie case remains against the petitioner. 5. Considering the admission of Assistant District Supply Officer that there were bogus cards in existence and sugar was also distributed against those cards, it is possible that the sugar was issued to them and which resulted in double enterics in the register. Apart from this, now 16 years have elapsed from the date of the alleged commissioning of the offence for which charges are framed against the petitioner. Apart from this, now 16 years have elapsed from the date of the alleged commissioning of the offence for which charges are framed against the petitioner. Looking to the period of offence and the period during which the petitioner faced criminal trial, in the interest of Justice, the proceedings should not be continued. Hence, I quash the charges levelled against the petitioner. The proceedings be dropped. *******