VIJAY KUMAR @ VIJAY TINA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tersenessly, the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the sole controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record, are that, on 18.11.2007, a police party headed by the SHO of Police Station City Rajpura, District Patiala, was on patrol duty. As soon as, at about 7.30 PM, the police party reached AP Jain Hospital Chowk, in the meantime, a secret information was received to the effect that petitioner- accused Vijay Kumar alias Vijay Tina and Ved Parkash son of Goverdhan used to illegally sell the kerosene at higher rate. It was also informed that on that day, they were bringing the kerosene from Patiala to Rajpura and if a Nakabandi is arranged, then the aforesaid vehicle alongwith the kerosene and accused can be apprehended. Considering the information to be correct and reliable, the police party arranged a checking post. During the course of checking of the vehicle TATA 207, bearing No. PB-11-AC-7226, ten drums of kerosene, each containing 220 litres, were recovered from the possession of the accused.

(2.) Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the prosecution claimed that since the accused used to possess and sell the kerosene at higher rate and ten drums of kerosene were recovered from their possession/vehicle, so, they have committed the offence punishable under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as "the E.C.Act"). In the background of these allegations, on the basis of aforesaid recovery of kerosene and in the wake of statement of SHO, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner-accused and his other co-accused, namely, Gurmit, Des Raj and Ved Parkash, by means of FIR No. 293 dated 18.11.2007 for the commission of the offences punishable under Section 7 of the E.C.Act and Section 420 IPC by the police of Police Station City Rajpura. After the completion of the investigation, the police submitted the challan/final police report under section 173 Cr.PC (Annexure P1) against the accused, in the manner depicted hereinbefore.

(3.) Faced with the grave situation, the petitioner-accused did not feel satisfied with the initiation of criminal prosecution by the police and preferred the present petition for quashing the impugned FIR and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.PC.