PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of Crl.Misc. Nos. 11502-M of 2003, 261216-M of 2002, 5330-M of 2002, 36960-M of 2002, 16104-M of 2002, 21623-M of 2003, 36414-M of 2005 and 22903-M of 2005.

(2.) AS the aforementioned cases involve identical facts and questions of law, the facts have been extracted from Crl. Misc. No. 11502-M of 2003 Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab.

(3.) THE petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. S.M. Rice and General Mills, Theri, Tehsil Gidderbaha, Distt. Muktsar. The complainant in the present case is Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, known as "Punsup" (hereinafter referred to as such). Admittedly, the firm constituted by the petitioner is involved in the business of custom milling of paddy. The complainant on the other hand is the agency that procures paddy, entrusts it to firms like the petitioner namely, firms that have capacity for storage and requisite plant and machinery for milling paddy and its consequent conversion into rice. Apart from Punsup, another agency, involved is the Food Corporation of India. The procurement agencies procure paddy, whereafter it is stored in godowns, belonging to the procurement agencies and thereafter, allocated for milling to rice millers like the petitioner. The rice miller, after milling and processing paddy, is required to return rice in accordance with the terms and conditions of an agreement executed inter parties. The amount of rice returned, in relation to the paddy supplied/entrusted, for obvious reasons is less than the paddy supplied. The exact parameters of storage of paddy milled, the quantity of rice to be returned as also the exact quantity to be returned the consequences of the failure to return etc., are all enumerated in government instructions, as also in an agreement that is generally executed between the agency and the rice miller.