BAJRANG LAL AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the accused in Gamharia P.S. Case No. 67 of 1992 (G.R. Case No. 33 of 1992) under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. In this writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for grant of appropriate writ for declaration that licence is not required by an Oil Miller under the provision of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Unification Order) and consequently in violation of the terms and conditions of the licence cannot attract any criminal prosecution under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

(2.) PETITIONERS No. 1 and 2 are the partners of M/s. Shree Gopal Gil Mills, Gamharia, and petitioners No. 3 is their Munim. Shree Gopal Oil Mills is carrying on business of milling and manufacturing of edible oils and they were selling the product to the whole sellers through commission agent or to the bulk consumer. The Mill/factory has been granted a licence under the Indian Factories Act. It is the further case of the petitioners that on the threat of prosecution they had been pressurised to obtain a wholesale license vide License No. 60 of 1985 under the Unification order. The Respondent No. 2 (Jai Prakash Choubey), the Supply Inspector on 11.11.1992 raided the factory premises of M/s. Shree Gopal Oil Mills and in that raid, high officers were also accompanied with the informant. As per the allegations against the petitioners during the course of raid, 73 tins of mustard oil was found in the stock but the opening stock was 285 tins of mustard oil as per the register maintained by the firm and during the physical verification 212 tins were found short. On 11.11.1992, 200 tins were sold on two separate challans. From 20.10.1992 to 11.11.1992,. no sale or purchase was shown in the stock register and it could also be found on verification of challans and cash memos that some fabrications were there which inferred that the sale of 200 tins were only a fictitious one. It was also alleged that proper display was not there regarding the stock, hence it was alleged that there was violation of Clause 20 of the Unification Order and as such the prosecution was lodged for violation of Clause 20 of the Unification Order and also regarding Terms No. 7 of the Licence. It was also alleged regarding the contravention of Clause 3 of the Bihar Essential Articles (Display of price and Stock) Order, 1977, 73 tins of mustard oil were seized and given in Zimmanama. After investigation, the Police submitted charge sheet under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and on receipt of the charge sheet, the Learned Special Judge, E.C. Act, by order dated 9.2.1993 took cognizance against the petitioners under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

(3.) THERE are two contentions in this writ petition. Mr. S.L. Agarwal, learned Counsel appearing for and on behalf of the petitioners contended that under the Unification Order, as per the definition of producer/manufacturer, there is no provision for taking of license and even if it is taken, then they were liable to take licenceunder the Unification Order but for producer or manufacturer, there is no form prescribed for taking the license and hence the whole sale license even if taken by the petitioners No. 1 and 2 cannot be said to be a legai one and superfluous one and for its violation, no prosecution can be lodged.