Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 808 (MP)

Chandra Prakash Jain v. State of M. P.

2020-08-14

SUJOY PAUL

body2020
ORDER 1. This is second visit of the petitioner to this Court. The Sub Divisional Officer by order dated 19.5.2020 directed the Junior Supply Officer Bada Malehra, District Chhatarpur for registration of FIR against the petitioner. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed WP. No.7774/20 decided on 17.6.2020 (Annexure P/3) wherein the main ground of attack was that as per Sub-clause (2) of Clause 16 of M.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015 (hereinafter called as 'Control Order') the prosecution is also a punishment and, therefore, before inflicting punishment, the petitioner should have been heard. This Court directed the learned Collector to consider the aforesaid aspect. In turn, the petitioner preferred a representation dated 23.6.2020 before the Collector but the learned Collector without considering the aforesaid facet rejected it by order dated 4.7.2020 (Annexure P/5). 2. Shri Lala, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on an order dated 15.2.2016 passed in WP. No.19253/15 whereby this Court interfered with an order dated 18.9.2015 on the ground that it was passed without affording opportunity of hearing. 3. Shri Lala submits that if this Court thinks that opportunity of hearing has not been provided, the matter may be remitted back before the learned Collector to pass appropriate order. 4. No other point is pressed by the parties. 5. I have heard the parties at length and perused the record. 6. If the order of learned Collector is examined in the juxtaposition of grounds raised in the representation dated 23.6.2020, it will be clear like noonday that the learned Collector has not taken pains to consider the question of providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before lodging an FIR. 7. Considering the aforesaid, the impugned order of learned Collector dated 3.7.2020 (Annexure P/4) and 4.7.2020 (Annexure P/5) are set aside. The matter is remitted back before the learned Collector to examine the representation of the petitioner in the light of observations made hereinabove and as per statutory provisions of Control Order. The petitioner shall produce this order before the learned Collector in the next week. In turn, the learned Collector shall consider and decide the same expeditiously. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 9. The petition is allowed.