NIJAMUDDIN ALIAS HAFIS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER :- This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection of Kanke P. S. Case No. 119 of 1987 for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and 414 of the Indian Penal Code including the order of taking cognizance dated 5-3-1999.

(2.) The short case of the prosecution as alleged that the Informant raided the house of the petitioner early in the morning and found 102 bags of Pora Coal lying in the southern portion of the courtyard. On interrogation the petitioner did not produce any licence and as such it was suspected that the said Pora coal was stolen one and it has been brought from Patratu side. Accordingly, F.I.R. was registered. The police investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner. The learned Special Judge took cognizance by the order dated 5-3-1999.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, at the very outset, submitted that the occurrence said to have been taken place in the year 1987 whereas cognizance has been taken in the year 1999 by the Special Judge, who has also got no power to take cognizance as admittedly Act 18 of 1981 by which Special provision by way of amendment in the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was inserted for a period of 15 years has already been expired and no further Act or Ordinance came into force. The Special Court being the Special Judge were constituted for the offence triable by the Judge who shall be appointed by the High Court as per Section 12A of the Essential Commodities Act and both Sections 12A and 12AA of the Act were inserted or provided by the said Special Provision (Act 18 of 1981). It is further submitted that there is a provision for punishment of three years u/S. 414, IPC and there is also provision for one year punishment u/S. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and as such cognizance has been taken after expiry of relevant period as provided u/S. 468(2)(c). It is further submitted that the confiscation proceeding was also initiated in respect of said 102 bags of Pora coal and the said proceeding was finally dropped after releasing the said Pora Coal in favour of eight persons who were the owners of the said Pora Coal. It is also argued that there is no storage limit of the coal and as such no offence u/S. 7 of the E.C. Act is made out.