T. HAMZA HAJI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are merchants doing business in different parts of Malappuram District. They are members of an association -- "The Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithi, Malappuram District Unit. The members of the association have formed a trust under the name and style "Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithi Trust, Malappuram. The petitioners are the office bearers of the trust. The trust has conceived some business promotion programmes. One such is "Customers' Bhagyadhara Scheme, 1998" launched in the middle of November, 1998. As per that scheme, free coupons will be supplied to the customers who purchase articles of different kinds above a specified amount from the merchants who are members of the scheme. Lots will be drawn at the end of the period of the scheme and prizes will be given to the lucky winners. Annexure I brochure issued shows that the proposal is to distribute prizes worth Rs. 25 lakhs after drawing lots in the middle of April, 1999. It is also stated that the merchants who participate in the scheme must make a contribution on the basis of their business turn over. It is made clear that the supply of coupons will be free, no amount will be levied for the coupons. Thus, from the scheme, it is fairly clear that the proposal is for the merchants to contribute a share of their profits to the trust and give it away as prizes to the few selected by drawing lots. The customer will not pay anything more for the goods purchased from the shops for getting the coupon though it may be an incentive to buy more, or above the limit fixed for getting the free coupons. The trust, of which the petitioners are the office bearers, have given publicity for the scheme through posters, newspaper advertisement etc.

(2.) The second respondent. Sub Inspector of Police. Malappuram has registered a case against the petitioners as Crime No. 407/98 of Malappuram Police Station alleging that the petitioners have committed an offence punishable under S.4 and 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The First Information Report is registered on the basis of a report from the Sub Inspector about the scheme and the reports and advertisements in the newspapers about it. The petitioners have approached this court praying for quashing the FIR itself stating that the scheme does not violate any provision of law and the registration of the case and attempt to ban the scheme lacks in bona fides. The petitioners have also a case that elsewhere also the merchant community is conducting similar schemes and registration of the case against the scheme conducted in Malappuram District alone is politically motivated,

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also the Additional Director General of Prosecutions on behalf of the respondent/State. The learned Public Prosecutor has also filed a statement.