SITARAM DEOKISAN HEDA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case has been placed before this Bench for a decision on the question whether an order of the Judicial authority under section 6c (1)of the Essential Commodity Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") is subject to the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under section 439 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

(2.) THE answer to the question must depend on whether the Judicial authority appointed by the State Government to hear appeals under section 6c (1) of the Act, against orders of confiscation of an essential commodity made by the Collector acting under section 6a, seized in pursuance of an order under section 3 of the Act, is an "inferior Criminal Court. "

(3.) IT is well settled that sections 435 and 439 of the Code must be read together. [see, Emperor v. Har Prasad Das (ILR 40 Cal. 477)]. Section 439 must, therefore, be read along with and subject to the provisions of section 435. Sub-section (1) of section 435 authorises the High Court to call for and examine the record of any proceeding before "any inferior criminal Court" situate within the local limits of its jurisdiction. The word 'proceeding' under section 439 must, therefore, mean a proceeding before an inferior criminal Court within in meaning of section 435 of the Code.