KRISHNA KUMAR Vs. SR SUPDT OF POLICE BULANDSHAHR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Large number of Writ Petitions have been filed for quashing the First Information Reports which have been lodged under Sections 3/7 Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Two such petitions in which leading arguments have been advanced are being disposed of by this order.

(2.) The Petrol Pump of M/s. Bhagwandin Gayaprasad situate at Ghatampur district Kanpur Dehat was inspected on 2-4-96 and sample of petrol and diesel was taken which was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Lucknow. The report of analysis showed that the sample of diesel was adulterated with Kerosene. Thereafter, a first information report was lodged by Dinesh Kumar Misra, Supply Inspector, Ghatampur against the proprietor of M/s. Bhagwandin Gaya Prasad and the Manager Sardar Husain under Sections 3/7 E. C. Act and Sections 406, 409, 417, 419 and 420 IPC at P. S. Ghatampur on the basis of which a case was registered as Crime No. 623/96. Writ Petition No. 127 of 1997 has been filed by M/s. Bhagwandin Gaya Prasad through its Partner Devi Prasad for quashing the F. I. R. The retail outlet of M/s. Khurja Highway Service Station G. T. Road, Khurja was inspected on 10-1-96 and sample of petrol and diesel was taken which was sent for analysis to Forensic Science Laboratory, Agra. The report of analysis showed that diesel was adulterated with kerosene. Shri Kunwar Pal Singh, Supply Inspector lodged a first information report against Khurja Highway Service Station under Sections 3/7 E. C. Act at P. S. Khurja Nagar on the basis of which a case was registered as Crime No. 290/96. Krishna Kumar and Manoj Kumar Partners of M/s. Khurja Highway Service Station have filed writ petition No. 2398 of 1996 for quashing the F. I. R. lodged against them.

(3.) Shri Ramendra Asthana learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the F. I. R. contains only an allegation that High Speed Diesel, the sample of which was taken from the petitioner's Petrol Pump was found to be adulterated but the extent or the exact quantity of adulteration is not mentioned and the allegation being vague the prosecution of the petitioners and the proceedings taken in pursuance thereof are liable to be quashed. In order to examine the contention raised, it will be useful first to refer to the statutory provisions.