BALDEV KISHAN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR No. 139 dated 9.9.1998 registered at Police Station Sirhind under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (for short 'the Act') and Section 406 IPC, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., charge-sheet dated 20.8.2004 and also charge-sheet dated 17.5.2005.

(2.) THE petitioners, along with one Palwinder Singh, were partners of M/s. Baba Fateh Singh Rice Mills, G.T. Road, Tarkhanmajra, Sirhind. It was alleged in the FIR that the petitioners entered into an agreement with the Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited, hereinafter referred to as "Markfed" through its District Manager and Senior Accounts Officer for custom milling of paddy for the year 1995-96. The agreement was executed on 28.2.1996. In pursuance thereto a total of 50635 bags of paddy was stored in the premises of M/s. Baba Fateh Singh Rice Mills, which remained under the possession and control of the Markfed and the firm. Out of the stock kept with the firm, 47815 bags were shelled against the delivery of advance rice. However, 2820 bags of paddy were misappropriated by the firm without consent and permission from the Markfed. It was further mentioned that when the complainant/Markfed brought the matter to the notice of the accused, they issued five cheques for a total amount of Rs. 21 lacs as security for the rice which had been misappropriated by them. An affidavit was also given that they were ready to give security amount of balance rice in shape of bank guarantee under which they promised to deliver the balance due quantity of rice in the coming season. However, the accused did not have sufficient funds in their account. On these allegations FIR was registered against the accused.

(3.) WHEN the petition came up for preliminary hearing on 19.7.2005, an argument was raised on behalf of the petitioners that the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act, 1981 and the Ordinance of 1997, which provided for the constitution of Special Courts to try offence under Section 7 of the Act, elapsed on 27.8.1998. Along with it, the Special Courts ceased to have powers to try offences under Section 7 of the Act, cognizance of which was taken after 27.8.1998. Hence, the Special Judge, who passed the order on 17.5.2005, while framing charges against the petitioners under Section 7 of the Act, acted illegally and without jurisdiction as the case was triable by the ordinary Court. Therefore, time was sought by the petitioners to make a necessary application before the Special Court for assigning the case to the concerned Court.