T ABDUL NAZAR Vs. P K MOHD KUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are the accused in S. T. 6 of 1985 pending before the Special Judge, Trichur. That case was instituted on a complaint filed by the first respondent, Drug Inspector. The complaint is for offences punishable under para 21 of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1979 read with S.3 and 7(l)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 In this petition filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the prayer is for quashing the proceedings in S T. 6/85. The simple question for consideration is whether the Special Judge is competent to take cognizance of the offence on a complaint filed by the Drugs Inspector and proceed with the case.

(2.) S.11 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Act 10/1955) reads:

(3.) The Essential Commodities Act was amended by the Essential Commodities (Special Provision) Act, 1981 (Act 18/1981). The amendments were intended to be operative only for a temporary period of five years. The object of the amendment was to deal more effectively with persons indulging in hoarding and black marketing of, and profiteering in, any essential commodities and the evils of vicious inflatory prices and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. S.2 of the Amendment Act provided that during its continuance, the Principal Act (Essential Commodities Act, 1955) shall have effect only subject to S.3 to 11 of the Amendment Act. By S.3 to 11 of the Amending Act, most of the sections in the principal Act were drastically amended temporarily for the purpose of achieving the above said object. S.10-A of the principal Act was amended. S.12 was omitted. S 12-A was substituted in order to provide for constitution of special courts consisting of a single judge. The single judge shall be a person qualified to be appointed as a Judge of the High Court or who has been a Sessions Judge or Addl. Sessions Judge for a minimum period of one year. A new provision was inserted as S.12-AA, which among other things provided that (1) all offences under the Act shall be triable only by a Special Court and (2) the Special Court may, upon perusal of a police report, take cognizance of the offence without the accused being committed to it for trial. The first provision mentioned above comes under S.12-AA(1)(a) and the second one comes under S.12-AA(1)(e). The contention is that on account of the provision referred to as item 2 above, the Special Court is competent to take cognizance only on a police report and by no other method. In other words, the argument was that by the introduction of S.12-AA(1)(e), S.11 of the principal Act must be deemed to have been impliedly repealed in its operation during the temporary period of five years when the amending Act is put in force.