MANOJ SAW Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Gomia P.S. Case No. 163/2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 841/2010 for the alleged offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, vide T.R. No. 1164/2010.

(2.) Prosecution story in short was that the informant Supply Inspector in his written report presented before the Gomia police on 4.9.2010 stated that he received secret information that 120 packets of rice, which belonged to the Food Corporation of India (FCI), were stored in the house of one Charo Marandi, resident of Jarkunda Tola of Chiddi Panchayat to be sold in the black market. He passed the information to the Block Development Officer, Gomia and a team was constituted comprising the Block Development Officer, Gomia and the house of Charo Marandi was raided. On search, 120 packets of rice other empty bags and an electric weighing machine were found. On query, Charo Marandi apprised the raiding party that he had let out the storeroom to the Petitioner Manoj Saw @ Manoj Kumar Barnwal of Gola Chowk, Bishnugarh Block, Hazaribagh. In the meantime, a 407 Truck No. JH-02-E-2341 arrived there and on interrogation, one of them disclosed himself to be Manoj Saw, who had come for loading and transportation of the rice packets on the said vehicle. He was immediately arrested and he confessed that the packets of the rice belonged to him and that he had come for transportation of the said packets to different place. All the aforesaid articles including the truck and 57 quintals 40 kg. rice were seized against the seizure list.

(3.) Learned Counsel Mr. Banerjee submitted that the Petitioner had purchased 120 bags of rice on 2.9.2010 from one Vijay Kumar Barnwal as against the receipt No. D-136461, issued under Jharkhand Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 2000 by Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hazaribagh. Petitioner had not violated any order or notification issued under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act so as to call for his punishment under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. He was neither a Dealer under the Public Distribution System (PDS) nor a licensee under the Jharkhand Trade Article (L.U.) Order and in absence of allegation with respect to violation of any control order or unification order as framed under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, any criminal prosecution against the Petitioner was not maintainable and the Petitioner cannot be said to have committed any offence much less offence alleged under Section 7 of the Act.