(1.) ON 16.11.1990, there was a checking of the Depot of the petitioner located in the area of Fazilka. The Executive Magistrate and Assistant Food and Supply Officer, Fazilka were present at the time of checking. During the enquiry and investigation, it transpired that the kerosene given to various customers was shown to be different than the kerosene actually issued and details of the said discrepancies in the actual sale of kerosene led to the registration of first information report on 4.1.1991.
(2.) THE total alleged cheating of Kerosene, the details of which were mentioned in the first information report, were that at one time there was issuance of 15 litres while 5 litres of kerosene was issued while at another time there was cheating of 10 litres and another time was that of 10 litres. The opening balance of kerosene on 16.11.1990 was 25 litres, Sugar 10,000 kgs.; receipt of kerosene-Nil; Sugar-Nil; sale of Kerosene-15 litres; Sugar 0,31,200 Kgs which was to be entered as kerosene Nil, Sugar-2,61,800 kgs.; balance kerosene-Nil; and Sugar - Nil. So the petitioner was being prosecuted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. In nut shell allegations remain to be that 5 consumers were shown to have received kerosene less than what was shown in the register of sale.
(3.) THE main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has been that if the checking was conducted on 16.11.1990 the FIR is registered on 4.1.1991, i.e. after lapse of more than 1-1/2 months. A large number of persons have filed affidavits Annexures P-2, P-3, P-4 and P-5. The affidavits rather had indicated that the consumers had obtained the same quantity of kerosene as was mentioned in the register. This matter was discussed at the time when the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the learned Special Judge, Ferozepur.