ASHWANI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this reference the accused have been prosecuted for contravention of the provisions of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985 (for short the Control Order ). They are being prosecuted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. During the pendency of the trial they have moved an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code for quashing of the prosecution launched against them on the ground that in the present case samples have not been taken by the concerned official in accordance with the provisions of the Order. It is further averred that in the F. I. R it is not stated that samples were obtained in polythene bag in the manner laid down in schedule II of the Order.

(2.) THIS petition came up for hearing before A. P. Chowdhari, J. His Lordship vide order dated 11-3-1991 had referred the matter for constitution of the Larger Bench en the ground that the observations made in the judgments of this Court reported in Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab, (1988) 15 Cr. L. T. 137, Gian Chand Luthra v. State of Punjab, (1989) 16 Cr. L. T. 55, Hans Raj v. State of Punjab, (1989-1) 95 P. L. R. 25 and Hardev Singh v. State of Punjab (1989) 16 Cr. L. T. 365. indicate that it should be stated in the F. I. R. that the sample has been taken in accordance with the provisions of the Control Order.

(3.) HIS Lordship doubted about the correctness of the observations made in these judgments that the fact that the sample has been taken in accordance with the Control Order should , be mentioned in the F. I. R. His Lordship has also expressed the view in the reference order that there is no procedure laid down in the Code that State should file reply to the quashing proceedings. If reply is not filed the averments mentioned in this petition for quashing cannot be assumed to be correct.