Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 913 (PAT)

Shyam Nandan Prasad Singh v. State Of Bihar

2006-10-10

MADHAVENDRA SARAN

body2006
Judgment 1. This application under sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short as the Code) has been filed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution against the petitioner pending before the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gaya vide G.R.1770/90 Tr.No. 1956/04, arising out of Tekari PS. Case No.90/99 under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (in short as E.C.Act) including the order of cognizance dated 14.8.2003 as well as the order dated 9.11.2004 refusing to discharge him from the case. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. on behalf of the State. 3. It is said that at the relevant time, petitioner Shyam Nandan Prasad Sinha was Assistant Godown Manager of State Food Corporation, Tekari. It is alleged that the petitioner and his Munshi Anil had hands in black-marketing of different food grains. It appears that on the written report of the Sub-divisional Officer, Tekari the Police registered a case against the petitioner and others under section 7 of the E.C.Act vide Tekari P.S.Case No.90/1999. It further appears that the Police after investigation submitted charge sheet against the petitioner and others on the basis of which the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate took cognizance by order dated 14.8.2003. 4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Food Corporation of India and the State Food Corporation are making purchases for sale and storage for sale of trade articles by or on behalf of the Central or the State Government. He pointed out that under Clause 31(2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licence Unification) Order, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred to as Unification Order) an exemption has been provided to the officers, Department, Institutions and other organisations of the State Government from the provisions of the Unification Order, 1984. He submitted that the provisions of Licences Unification Order as mentioned above is not appliable against the officers of State Food Corporation and Food Corporation of India. In support of his contention, he referred to Annexure-4 which is an order dated 24.6.2004 passed by this Court in Cr.Misc.No.514 of 2004 styled as Kanti Prasad vs. The State of Bihar. Learned counsel submitted that in view of above exemption as provided in the Unification Order, 1984 petitioners prosecution is an abuse of process of Court. 5. Now it is admitted position that at the relevant time the petitioner was Assistant Godown Manager of State Food Corporation, Tekari. Learned counsel submitted that in view of above exemption as provided in the Unification Order, 1984 petitioners prosecution is an abuse of process of Court. 5. Now it is admitted position that at the relevant time the petitioner was Assistant Godown Manager of State Food Corporation, Tekari. It is also admitted position that he is sought to be prosecuted under section 7 of E.C.Act with the allegation that he was involved in black-marketing of food grains, 6. Having considered the argument of both the parties and the principle as laid down by this Court vide Annexure-4 the prosecution of the petitioner under section 7 of E.C.Act, in my considered opinion, is not maintainable in view of aforesaid exemption clause of the Bihar Trade articles (Licence Unification), 1984. Such being the position, the prosecution of the petitioner in Tekari PS. Case No.90/1999 corresponding to G.R.No. 1770/90/Tr.No.1956/04 pending before the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gaya is therefore, quashed. 7. This application is accordingly allowed in respect of the petitioner only.