SHAMBHU NATH AGARWALA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the criminal prosecution including the order taking cognizance, dated 2-1-1986 passed by Sri N. K. Prasad, Special Judge, (E. C. Act), Dhanbad, whereby he had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, in the following circumstances.

(2.) It appears that the Marketing Officer, Dhanbad, on 28-12-1985 had inspected the business premises of the petitioner who is a wholesale dealer having a wholesale dealer's licence and in course of Inspection at two places 647 bags of rice (welghing 645.50 quintals) In total, were found in stock The allegation made agaiast this petitioner who is a wholesale dealer is that he was found to have stored rice beyond the storage limit fixed for such nature of business Thereafter complaint was filed and cognizance was taken which is being challenged in this application.

(3.) Mr. G. C. Bharuka, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there was no storage limit fixed at the relevant time and, therefore, the petitioner had not committed any offence. It is also submitted that the State Government has not defined what is A, B and C classes of city and what is the storage limit fixed in respect of aforesaid classes of city or for rural or urban area. In absence of such notification or fixation of storage limit, the criminal prosecution of the petitioner is an abuse of the process of the court.