STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JALARAM AGENCIES JUNAGADH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the trial Court, after the receipt of complaint against the respondent-accused before it, right at the very threshold of its preliminary inquiry while trying to find out whether it was empowered to take cognizance of the alleged offence punishable under Sec. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, (for short "The Act") was justified, firstly in summarily dismissing the complaint on the alleged ground that the complainant was not duly authorised either by the State Government or the Central Government as for that purpose, the Collector cannot be said to be the "State" as required under Sec. 12AA (1)(e) of the Act, and secondly, that too without giving fair and reasonable opportunity to the complainant to prove his due authorisation in said regard ?? In other words, whether such important questions which many a time are mixed questions of law and fact can be decided without anything brought on the record on mere oral arguments ? These, in short and substance, are the two important questions that arise for our consideration in the backdrop of the following facts-situation.

(2.) According to the complainant Mr. J. D. Dave, Dy. Mamlatdar (Civil Supply), the respondent No. 1 - M/s. Jalaram Agencies, Petrol Pump, Mendarda (Junagadh) and four others who incidentally happen to be its partners and the manager were doing the business of selling petrol and diesel under the licence No. 23 issued by authorities under the Gujarat Essential Articles (Licensing, Control and Stock Declaration) Order, 1981 (for short "Order of 1981"). That on 16-7-1993, he in the company of the panch witnesses inspected the petrol pump of the respondents, and after taking the samples of petrol and diesel, seized the same and ultimately forwarded it to the Forensic Science Laboratory which on analysis was reported back to have difference of 0.0049 density of the petrol, which was clearly beyond the statutory limits prescribed and accordingly was not up to the statutory standards stipulated for petrol. In this view of the matter, since the accused committed breach of the licence condition No. 5 issued under the Order of 1981, and the Rule 2 of the Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Prevention of Malpractices, Supply & Distribution) Order, 1990 amounting to an offence punishable under Sec. 7 of the Act, on case papers being placed before the Collector, Junagadh, the complainant by his order bearing Ref. No. Food A. D./Namuna-21/93 dated 28-2-1994 was authorised to file a complaint against the respondents before the Court.

(3.) Accordingly on 29-4-1994, when the aforesaid complaint was presented before the Special Court at Junagadh, after registering the same as Special Case No. 1 of 1994, the matter was fixed for preliminary hearing so as to find out whether the complainant was duly authorised to file the complaint or not. Thereafter, after hearing the learned A.P.P., the learned Special Judge by an Order dated 3-6-1994 dismissed the complaint in substance holding that the Collector was neither a State Government nor the Central Government so empowered or authorised to give direction to file complaint. Not only that but under the provisions as contained in Sec. 12AA (1)(e) of the Act, the concerned public servant or the officer should be duly authorised by notification in this regard issued by the appropriate Government, as the case may be. If any complaint is filed in absence of this, the Court cannot take cognizance of the offence. It further appears that when this preliminary point was argued by the learned A.P.P., and ultimately decided by the learned trial Judge the complainant was not called upon to remain present before the Court, to make good his case by producing relevant material on the record. It is this careless conduct of the case by learned P.P., and resultant slipshod order which has been challenged before us by way of present appeal raising quite an important and interesting question of interpretation of S.11 and 12AA (1)(e) of the Act and as to how, when such questions are raised, the trial Court is expected to conduct itself !