KAMESHWAR PRASAD SARDA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Section 482, Cr PC has been filed for quashing the order dated 16.7.1999 passed.in Chaibasa Sadar P.S.Case No. 4/97 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1/97, whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge, E.CAct, Chaibasa took cognizance under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and for quashing the entire criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioner.

(2.) FACTS leading to the filing of the application are that one Birendra Prasad, Child Development Project Officer and Incharge, Block Supply Office, Noamundi made a written complaint before the police that on 13 -14.2.1997 he inspected the business establishment of the petitioner from 4 p.m. and 310 bags of rice (300 quintals) and 49 bags of wheat were found in one godown and thereafter verification was conducted in another godown situated to the west of Sultania Automobiles. In the aforesaid godown 15 items, as stated in the written report, were found including Suji, Chana, Atta and 3 bags of sugar. Thereafter verification was conducted in the rented godown of Arjun Lodha and in one of the fwo rooms of the said godown wheat, masoor dal, chana dal, rice and different brands of refined oil and Dalda were found. In the southern room also rice, Chana dal, Dhania, Khesari Dal, Mung Dal, Methi, Arhar Dal, Matar, Chana etc. were found. In all 457 bags of rice, 75 bags of wheat and 307 tins of edible oil were found. The stock register was inspected and it was found that upto 13.2.1997, 310 bags of rice and 49 bags of wheat had been entered in the register. There is no entry of any other commodities. No fortnightly return had been submitted in the Block Supply Office except for rice. Further in the licence, there is reference of only one godown but there is no mention of the other godowns, from where several commodities were recovered. The allegation is that some food grains were kept concealed in unauthorised godowns, which constitutes an offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The commodities, which were found in the two unauthorised godowns, were seized under a seizure list and made over to the police. On the basis of that, a case was registered and investigation was carried out and after investigation, the police submitted chargesheet in the case against the petitioner. It is further submitted that after lodging the FIR a proposal was sent to the Deputy Commissioner -cum -Collector, Chaibasa for confiscation of the seized articles and on receipt of the said proposal the Confiscation Case No. 8/97 was instituted by the Deputy Commissioner -cum -Collector, Chaibasa and the petitioner was directed to show cause as to why seized articles be not confiscated under Section 6 -A of the EC Act on the ground that as per the allegation, the petitioner was having unauthorized godown and that he has not submitted the fortnightly return to the Block Supply Office. The petitioner filed reply to the show cause and specifically stated that search and seizure made by the Child Development Project Officer is illegal and he is not a person authorized under clause 30 of the Unification Order to conduct search and seizure. The storage of food grains in the house owned by Arjun Lodha was made after intimation was given to the District Supply Officer, Singhbhum (West) at Chaibasa on 11.1.1997 and he has got no connection with the godown located in the West of Sultania Automobile. The Deputy Commissioner -cum -Collector, Chaibasa, by order dated 30.10.1998 was pleased to drop the confiscation proceeding and directed release of the seized articles.

(3.) CONSIDERING the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the fact that the final form was submitted as an error of law and also the fact that by order dated 30.10.1998 the confiscation proceeding was dropped, there is some substance in the quashing application.