SOM NATH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under S. 438, Cr. P.C. filed by the accused petitioner, seeking grant of anticipatory bail in a case bearing FIR No. 189 dated 14-10-2000 under S. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as Act), recorded in PS Sadar, Panipat.

(2.) At the outset the question arose as to whether the offence under S. 7 of the Act is bailable or non-bailable. Hence the learned counsel for the parties were directed to address their arguments on this question.

(3.) After hearing the counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, it transpires that S. 7 of the Act, as it stood prior to the amendment of the said Act by virtue of the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act, 1981, would be relevant in this regard. It transpired that under S. 10-A of the Act, as it stood prior to 1981 amendment, every offence punishable under the said Act was cognizable. Subsequently, by virtue of 1981 Amendment Act, the words "and non-bailable" were inserted. Initially, this was done for a period of 5 years from the date of commencement of 1981 Amendment Act (1st September, 1982). Later on, this period of 5 years was enhanced to 10 years. Later on this period was extended to 15 years. After the expiry of the said period of 15 years, the amendments which were introduced by way of 1981 amendment Act, ceased to exist. The Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Ordinance, 1997, was promulgated by the President of India on 3rd October, 1997, whereby the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was amended. However, no Act was passed by the Parliament in this regard. Subsequently, 2 more Ordinances were promulgated by the President of India in the year 1998, amending the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Even amendment bill was also introduced in the Parliament. However, no Act was passed by the Parliament, amending the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. In this manner, the Ordinances promulgated in the years 1997 and 1998 lapsed in due course of time. The resultant effect is that the provisions of S. 7 of the Act, which existed prior to 1981 Amendment Act, would be applicable to the present case.