RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.7.2006 passed by Sessions Judge, Nawadah in Cr.Rev. No. 71 of 2006 as well as the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah under Section 7 of the E.C. Act in Nawadah (Sadar) PS. Case No. 40 of 2005.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case is that an FIR was registered on 75.2005 by the Supply Inspector, Nawadah, Praveen Kr. Sinha wherein it was alleged that the petitioner was appointed as a Distributor under the Sampoorna Gramin Rojgar Yojana (for short SGRY) and that on the instructions of the S.D.O, Nawadah Sadar a raid was carried out on 5.5.2005 at Jai Mata Di Dharam Kanta on Nawadah -Ranchi Road (NH -31) and in the basement of the said Jai Mata Di Dharam Kanta a godown was located wherein it was alleged that 469.78 quintals of rice was found instead of 964.68 quintals. The petitioner being a licensee of Public Distribution System (for short P.D.S.) was granted licence to trade from Akauna Bazar, Nawadah. He was obliged to store all his 964.68 quintals of rice, allotted to him under SGRY at Akauna Bazar, Nawadah and as such he violated Clauses 2(a) & (b), 4, 8 and 9 of the Licence granted to him underB ihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 (for short 'Control Order '). The other allegation in the F.I.R. against the petitioner was that there was shortfall of 494.90 quintals of rice as the petitioner ought to have had 964.68 quintals of rice in his stock under the SGRY and as such the petitioner had black marketed 494.90 quintals.

(3.) PERUSED the orders impugned. It appears that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance in violation of Unification Order which is not binding on the petitioner. As such, the orders impugned of both the courts below are not sustainable in the eye of law and they are accordingly quashed. In the result this application is allowed.