SHRIRAM RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing the entire prosecution including the First Information Report lodged as Bettiah Mufassil P.S. case No. 40 of 2004 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

(2.) Short facts giving rise to the present application are that the District Supply Officer West Champaran, Bettiah, gave a written report to the officer-in-charge of the Bettiah Mufassil Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on 23.2.2004 two trucks bearing registration No. BR 28-9859 and BR-06-C-2622 were found infront of the godown of the State Food Corporation at Bettiah laden with 300 bags of rice each. In the report it was further alleged that the rice was brought from Gopalganj and Rohtas for black marketing. In the opinion of the District Supply Officer, instead of the rice being sold to the purchase centre by the farmers, it is being done by the middle men and consequently the farmers are not getting the benefit of the Scheme. On the basis of the aforesaid information Bettiah Mufassil P.S. Case No. 40 of 2004 was registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

(3.) Mr. Y.V. Giri, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioners contends that no order made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act restricts movement of rice from one place to another and, as such, petitioners cannot be said to have violated any order made under the aforesaid provision to bring the act within the mischief of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. In support of his submission he has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Santosh Kumar v. State of Bihar 1990 (2) PLJR 520, and my attention has been drawn to paragraph 9 of the judgment, which reads as follows :- It is painful to note that the authorities who are the custodians of law and order are not acquainted with the latest position of law. The said Movement Control Order for the violation of which the petitioner has been put to harassment, was rescinded as far back as on 30th September, 1977. In that view of the matter the entire prosecution seems to be without any legal foundation and it is fit to be quashed at this stage.