SATYENDRA NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application uder Section 482, Cr PC is directed against v, dated 23.11.1992 by which the Special Judge (EC Act cases), Patna, has taken cognizance for offence under Section 7, EC Act in Special Case No. 28/90. The petitioner is sought to be prosecuted as the stock of sugar was found short by 1.5 kgs.

(2.) IT has been submitted that as per the notification issued by the Central Government, dated 9.2.1988 minor variation in respect of single commodity up to 1.5% calculated on the basis of transaction of one month is to be condoned. From the facts stated in the prosecution report and the impugned order, it appears that in the present case the variation was not more than 1.5% calculated on the basis of stock of that date without verifying whether the storage came within the permissible limit calculated on the basis of transactions for the whole month. In view of the fact that the case has been instituted for the alleged shortage of stock on the basis of single days stock and the quantity of shortage was 1.5 kg. only, I do not wish to go into that question. I am satisfied that the case of the petitioner is substantially covered by the aforesaid notification, dated 9.2.1988.

(3.) ANOTHER allegation against the petitioner is that he did not produce stock register. In my opinion, the thrust of the prosecution case is shortage of stock. That having been held to be not correct basis for launching prosecution, the petitioner should not be compelled to face the rigors of the prosecution on the basis of general allegation regarding non -production of stock register.