SURESH CHANDRA JAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A proceeding under Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act is pending against the revisionist accused and cognizance has been taken by the court on 13-6-1978 on a fresh charge-sheet. The applicant later preferred an application on 21-8-82 before the trial court that no charge can be framed against the applicant revisionist and that application was rejected by the trial court on 1-9-1982 directing that a charge under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act be framed against the revisionist. The revisionist has come forward in this revision feeling aggrieved from the same.

(2.) The stand of the revisionist is that the Magistrate had taken cognizance regarding the same matter on charge-sheet No. 40 filed by the police on 2-3-1974 and ultimately as sanction under Section 11 of the Essential Commodities Act was wanting, the case was dropped amounting to his discharge, so any fresh cognizance on any supplementary charge-sheet could not be taken. It was also maintained that the earlier discharge of the applicant on 8-9.1977 bars the present trial.

(3.) During arguments it was further urged that under Section 173(8), Criminal Procedure Code a supplementary charge-sheet could be given only on discovery of any new evidence and further investigation could be carried, while in this case there is no fresh evidence.