AMRIT SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by the petitioner for release on bail in anticipation of his arrest.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehementiy contended that the petitioner is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of professional rivalry. The case against the petitioner was registered on July 3,1994. Till then there was no expert report with regard to the factum of alleged adulteration of cement. Hence, no case could have been registered against the petitioner. No commission of cognizable offence is made out from the F.I.R. registered against the petitioner. Thus the entire investigation is illegal and invalid. Mixing is no offence and as such no case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience) is made out. Cement is not an essential commodity as defined under Section 2(a) of the Act. Hence no offence could have been committed by the petitioner. No notice as required under Section 6-B of the Act was issued. The co-accused persons Gulfarn and Anurodh Singh have already been released on bail. The learned Counsel thus contends that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail.

(3.) Learned PP, Ms. Mukta Gupta, on the other hand, has urged to the contrary.