BRAHMANANDA PROSAD Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revisional application under section 482 of Cr.PC for quashing the proceedings in Special Case No. 38 of 1991 under section 7(1) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, pending before the learned Speical Court (under the Essential Commodities Act) at Siliguri for contravention of paragraphs 10(1)(3) and 13(5) of the West Bengal Licensing of Dealers of Cement and Distribution of Levy Cement Order, 1982.

(2.) The complaint was lodged against the petitioners under section 7(1) (a) (ii) of the E.C. Act, 1955 for violation of paragraphs 10(1) (3) and 13(5) of the West Bengal Licensing of Dealers of Cement and Distribution of Levy Cement Order 1982, hereinafter referred to as, the order, on the basis which G.R. Case No. 53(11) of 1987 was started and subsequently on being referred to the Special Court was registered as Special Case No. 38/91 at Siliguri. The complaint was in the term that the petitioner No. 2, Anchal Pradhan of a local Panchayat, drew 150 bags of ACC cement from the Government godown for the purpose of development work in his Anchal, but was unloaded the cement before the godown owned by the petitioner No. 1, while the local people accosted him and the matter was informed to the police. The I.O., however, submitted final report before the Special Court. The learned Judge, Special Court was not satisfied with the final report and directed the Investigating Officer to record statements of certain specific persons, namely some Government Officers, in course of further investigation. The I.O. complied with the direction of the Special Court and as such the case was kept pending beyond the time limit when the report was submitted to the learned Special Judge. Thereafter by his order dated 13-7-88 the learned special Judge held on perusal of the materials maintained in the c.d. that there were sufficient materials to proceed against the present petitioners and one Tarapada Biswas for the offence as alleged. Thereafter the learned Special Court treated the final report filed by the I.O. on 16-5-88 as complaint and took cognizance of the offence under sub-clause (3) of section 12A of the EC Act, 1955 as amended up to date and issued process against the petitioners and Tarapada Biswas. The petitioners, however, filed petition before the learned Special Court for their discharge on the ground of contravention of section 167(5) of the Code and the illegality committed by the learned special court in directing investigation and taking cognizance on the final report. The learned Special Judge, however, rejected the petition. No relief was allowed to the petitioners by the successors of the Special Court who passed order dated 13-7-88 on the ground that any such action was beyond their jurisdiction and as such the case against the petitioners continued. The petitioners challenge the aforesaid order by filing this revisional application.

(3.) In this case none appears for the State of West Bengal and the case goes ex parte.