RAMSIYA CHOURASIYA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity, the 'CrPC') has been invoked for seeking quashing of FIR No. 18/2011 registered at Police Station Bharoli, District Bhind (MP) alleging commission of offences punishable under Sec. 3 read with Sec. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in Short, 'EC Act').

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present application are that the Authority empowered to carry out inspection of the fair price shops allotted under the Madhya Pradesh (Khadya Padaarth) Saarvjanik Naagrik Poorti Vitran Scheme, 1991 (in short, 'Scheme of 1991'), conducted an enquiry as to the manner of distribution carried out by the present applicant who is the Secretary in Sewa Sahkari Sanstha, Bharoli Khurd and against one Ram Naresh, who is Additional Secretary in the said fair price shop. During the course of enquiry, the statements of the Ration Card Holders were recorded and the same revealed that during the period of May and June 2009, the distribution of Kerosene was not carried out by the fair price shop. Accordingly, a complaint was made and an FIR was directed to be registered against the present applicant and the Additional Secretary, which led to recording of FIR dated 24.05.2011 bearing Crime No. 18/2011. According to the contents of the FIR, the present applicant has been alleged to have violated Clause 6.2, Clause 6.3, Clause 6 (d), Clause 7 (4) and Agreement Condition No. 8 which is punishable under Sec. 3 read with Sec. 7 of the EC Act. The present application has been filed for seeking quashment of the FIR.

(3.) As per the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant, the FIR has been registered on the basis of the Scheme of 1991, which is not the Control Order under Sec. 3 of EC Act. Therefore, the registration of FIR for violation of Scheme of 1991 cannot be done. It was submitted that this Court in the case of Surendra Tyagi Vs. State of M.P., M.Cr.C. No. 1912/2010, decided on 22.11.2010 , has held that an FIR registered for violation of Scheme of 1991 cannot be made basis for prosecution as this Court in Shiv Kumar Vs. State of M.P., (2005) 4 MPLJ 117 , has held that the Scheme of 1991 is not a Control Order under Sec. 3 of the EC Act. Therefore, the Prosecution cannot move forward.