GOPAL DAS BHADANI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing the proceeding at present pending in the Court of the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih and the order taking cognizance dated 13-5-1982. Whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 7 and 9 of the Essential Commodities Act, against the petitioners, in the following circumstances.

(2.) It appears that petitioner No. 1 is the licensee and petitioner No. 2 is his father. The business premises of petitioner No. 1 was inspected on 11-7-1981, when it was closed and the business had not commenced- Thereafter it is claimed that the informant detected some irregularities resulting into the contravention of the Bihar Essential Articles (Display of Price and Stock) Order, 1977 and the Bihar Food-grains Dealers Licensing Order, 1967. The informant who is the Marketing Officer, Giridih, filed a FIR, being Giridih (T) P. S. Case No. 223, dated 11-7-1981, under Sections 7 and 9 of the Essential Commodities Act. Charge-sheet was ultimately submitted and cognizance was taken.

(3.) Mr. Ramautar Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the whole prosecution is bad in law because of non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of proviso to clause (6) of the, Biha? Essential Articles (Display of Price and Stock) Order, 1977, which was the pre-conditioned requirement and because of non-compliance it has rendered the whole prosecution bad, including the order taking cognizance. In order to substantiate his submission, learned counsel has relied upon the rulings reported in 1986 PLJR 230, and 1987 PLJR 678, Both the aforesaid rulings say that for prosecution of a person under the Bihar Essential Articles (Display of Price and Stocks) Order, Iy77 and Bihar Food-grains Dealers Licensing Order, 1967, sanction is the essential require ment, otherwise the whole prosecution will be rendered void.