KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated August 18, 1988, passed by the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Sri Ganganagar, by which the learned Special Judge framed charges against the petitioners Under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Under -Sections 406 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) MR . Ramcharan, Assistant District Supply Officer, lodged a First Information Report on April 2, 1984, Under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sections 406 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code against Mohan Lal and Krishna Kumar with the allegations that on April 1, 1984, on an information given by some 'MUKHBIR' he with the help of the police party, went to the house of Mohan Lal, situated at 15 -P Block, Sri Ganganagar, and found a tractor with a Iroily, bearing No. RSC 8280, standing in front of his house and the trolly of it was loaded with levy cement. On enquiry, he was informed by the petitioner Mohanlal that he got the contract of construction of a water -pond in village 10 -S.D.S. by the Public Health and Engineering Department, for which the cement was issued from the godown of the P.H.E.D. and out of which he has taken 30 bags of levy cement for the personal use of his nephew Krishna Kumar and, therefore, this cement has been kept in the house. An enquiry regarding the permit was made, but neither any permit was shown nor was any reason given as to why the levy cement was kept in the house. It was further mentioned that the accused have misused the cement issued to him and, therefore, a prayer was made for taking proper action against the accused. On this information, a case Under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sections 406 and 411 1PC was registered and the police, after necessary investigation present a Final Report, so far as accused Mohan Lal is concerned, but the police submitted the challan against accused Krishna Kumar Under Section 3/7 of the Essentiual Commoidities Act and Sections 406 and 411 IPC. After the submission of the challan, an application was moved by the learned Public Prosecutor for taking cognizance against accused Mohanlal also, and the learned Special Judge took the cognizance against accused Mohan Lal, also. After the service of the summons on Krishan Kumar and Mohan Lal, the learned Special Judge, on August 18, 1988, after giving an oportunity of hearing to the petitioners, framed the charges against them Under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and section 406 and 120B, IPC. It is against this order, framing the charges, that the petitioners have preferred this petition Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Rajasthan Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Order, 1974') is not applicable in the case of a private party as it deals with (he licensee only and if at all it deals with the private dealer only and not with the Government Contractor. It has, also, been contended on behalf of the petitioners that there is an agreement (Schedule -I) on record, according to which if the cost of the stores supplied by the department, if found damaged, lest of issued in excess of the requiremenmt and not returned or missing, shall be recovered at twice the issue rate of the stores. Thus, at the most is a civil liability of the petitioners and no criminal liability can be fastened against the petitioners. It has, also, been contended that the petitioners fulfilled the complete contract and final bill was submitted. Lastly, it was submitted that if at all there is any violation, then the violation is only with respect of the licence only and not with respect to the Order, 1974. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, has supported the order passed by the learned Special Judge and submitted that no illegality has been committed by the learned lower Court in framing the charges against the petitioner.