H L BAHETI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KHERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an occupier of a sugar mill. Under the U. P. Sugarcane (Supply and Purchase) Order, 1954, clause 5 (10), the Cane Commissioner on 6-12-78 directed the occupier of the mill to establish a new purchasing centre at Dhakarva Chauraha apart from the existing purchasing centre which was located at Jatpurwa. THE existing purchasing centre Jatpurwa earlier used to cover the cane-growers both of Jatpurwa and Dhakarva Chauraha areas. However, on the demand of the cane-growers who were nearer to Dhakarva Chauraha and considering other relevant factors, the Cane Commissioner passed the said order dated 6-12-78 requiring him to have two separate purchase centres for the two areas. This was challenged in appeal by the petitioner. That appeal is still pending and no stay order was passed in favour of the petitioner. On 13-12-78 the District Cane Officer took the view that by his failure to comply with the order dated 6-12-78 the petitioner had committed an offence punishable under section 22 of the U. P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953. Accordingly, a complaint was filed under section 22 read with section 33 (1) of the said Act by the District Magistrate. THE petitioner has filed this petition under section 482 CrPC for quashing the prosecution.

(2.) SEVERAL grounds have been taken in the petition for challenging the validity of the charge against the petitioner. The validity of the order dated 6-12-78 has, inter alia, been challenged on a number of grounds. It is, however, not necessary to consider the various contentions raised in the petition because I am of the opinion, after hearing learned counsel Tor the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate, that the petition must succeed on a short ground.