K.C.VENU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are accused in CC No.311/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chalakkudy for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Section 7(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 ['EC Act', for short]. The petitioners are husband and wife. The second petitioner has obtained a distributorship of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) for distribution of LPG gas cylinders. Annexure-A5 is the agreement that is entered into between the second petitioner and the BPCL. In connection with the business, the second petitioner has also obtained registration under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, which is at Annexure-A2.

(2.) The contention of the prosecution is that on 22.7.2012 at about 11.40 a.m., the defacto complainant found 17 cylinders of Bharat Gas kept illegally in a shed in the courtyard of the house of the accused persons situated in Kakkad Desom of Kalloor Vadakkum Muri Village without any document supporting Crl.MC 1891/2013 possession/storage for the purpose of sale, intending to make unlawful gains. The First Information Report is at Annexure-A1. There is no dispute that the second petitioner is the proprietrix of the gas agency conducted under the name "Kandarumadathil Gas Agency" having its area of operation within Ollur P.O. in Thrissur District.

(3.) To attract an offence under Section 7(2) of the EC Act, what is to be proved is that a person to whom a direction is given under clause (b) of sub- Section (4) of Section 3 of the EC Act, should have failed to comply with that direction; only then is he responsible for the penal provision under Section 7(2) of the EC Act. There is not a scintilla of evidence produced by the prosecution to indicate that any such direction as contemplated in clause (b) of sub-Section (4) of Section 3 of the EC Act was given to the petitioners. What exactly is, the order that has been violated by the petitioners is not specified anywhere in the final report, and all that is borne out from the final report is that the petitioners had unauthorisedly stored 17 cylinders in their courtyard. The fact that Crl.MC 1891/2013 the 17 cylinders, which were actually part of the gas cylinders meant for distribution by the distributor concerned, is owned by the second petitioner is not in dispute. The place where it is to be stored was probably different. That would definitely not attract a serious offence under Section 7(2) of the EC Act. The prosecution is flawed and without any legs to stand on. I therefore find that the prosecution cannot continue. There are sufficient grounds to find that the accusation against the petitioners need to be quashed exercising the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.PC. In the result, the Criminal MC is allowed and the entire proceedings as against the petitioners herein in CC No.311/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chalakkudy shall stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.PC.