HARIBABU SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure petitioner has prayed for quashing the proceedings against him under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhind.

(2.) The brief facts, just essential for the decision of this case are that the petitioner being the Secretary of Bratakar Sahakari Sewa Samiti was engaged in running the Fair Price Shop under the Public Distribution System Order 2009 for distribution of essential commodities to the ration card holders. It is alleged that after having come to know through various complaints that the petitioner is involved in committing irregularities in distribution foodstuffs to the card holders and thereby violated the rules of the Public Distribution System, an inquiry was conducted by the Sub Divisional Officer. After inquiry, the report was sent to the concerning police station for registering the FIR against the petitioner for the offence of the contravention of the provisions of certain Control Orders promulgated relating to essential commodities under Section 3 of the Act which is punishable under Section 7 of the Act. On lodging FIR, the investigation was set in motion. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhind. The trial is under progress.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the Sub Divisional Officer, Bhind was not authorised by any Act/rules/notification/order from the competent authorities for initiating action against the petitioner and therefore the FIR lodged on his report is beyond jurisdiction. It is submitted that the petitioner has neither violated any of the conditions of the Central Order nor contravenes any rules/notification issued by the State Government/Central Government, which is an offence punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Therefore, it is prayed that the entire criminal proceeding pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhind alongwith FIR lodged on the report of SDO is liable to be quashed. To support his submissions, learned counsel placed reliance on the decisions rendered in the cases of M/s Bhurey Lal Mahesh Chandra & others Vs. State of U.P,1987 EFR 378), Smt. Sushila Chaudhary & another Vs. State of U.P. & others,1987 EFR 336) and Hema Bhadoriya Vs. State of M.P.,2008 1 EFR 198] including one un-reported order of this court passed in M.Cr.C.No.3210/11 (Sonu Jain Vs. State of M.P.).