RAM NARAIN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ applications involving common questions of law and fact were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment

(2.) In Cr. W.J.C. 130/90R, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of seizure of 152 quintals, 70 kgs of rice seized by Senior Marketing Officer, Palamau as also the proceeding under section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act being Miscellaneous Case No. 29191. In the aforementioned case, the petitioners contended that petitioner No. 1 is a license bearing license No.9 of 1988. An inspection was made in the shop premises of the petitioner on or about 28.8.1990 and some amount of rice was seized as per the seizure list as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ application on the ground of violation of some conditions of license, details whereof are not necessary to be stated in view of the point involved in these writ applications. Cr.W.J.C. Nos. 134 and 135 of 1990-R have been filed by the petitioners who are owners of certain trade articles and a truck bearing registration No. BBI 6861. In the aforementioned two cases, some amount of wheat was allegedly loaded on the aforementioned truck. Allegedly, it was stated by the driver that the said wheat had come from Sasaram and was required to be delivered to M/s. Ranglal Flour Mills. According to the prosecution, Ranglal Flour Mills was closed for a few months and, thus, the question of placing of any order by the said Mill for supply of wheat did not arise.

(3.) It was alleged that allegations of violation of the provisions of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984, the aforementioned amount of wheat and the truck were seized and, thereafter, a criminal case was also instituted which is contained in Annexure-1 to both the writ applications.