M.Wahajuddin - (1.) THE applicants are Awadh Sugar Mills Ltd. Hargaon and the Occupier, General Secretary and Assistant Secretaries of the Sugar Mill. would appear that vide Annexure "1" to the affidavit, a complaint has been launched against the applicants on the allegations that under Section 10-A of the U. P. Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam (Act No. 24 of 1964), vide Order No. 6403/XX- Sheera Fund dated 21-8-1977 of the Excise Commissioner and Controller of Molasses, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad, a joint account in the name of Awadh Sugar Mill, Hargaon, and Excise Inspector of a wadh Sugar Mill was to be opened in come bank or Post Office and certain amounts were required to be deposited by way of creation of separate funds, and the applicants have not deposited the amount to the tune of rupees six lacs and odd in that fund and have thus, committed breach of Section 10-A of the aforesaid Adhiniyam and the aforesaid Act as to be punishable under Section 11 of the Adhiniyam.
(2.) WHILE a large number of grounds were taken in this application under Section 482, CrPC also challenging the vires of Section 10-A of the aforesaid Act, but as there has been a pronouncement by a Division Bench of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ No. 6571 of 1978, Awadh Sugar Mills v. Excise Commissioner, and various other connected writ petitions, the arguments have now been confined to the submission that a notification of 31st December, enhancing the rate as well as directing the applicants to create a separate fund in the joint name of the Sugar Mills and the Excise Inspector attached to the Factory is ultra vires. It is submitted that the amount that has been calculated is based on the enhanced rate of deposit, while enhancement has not; been made on any rational basis and is excessive, hence, no deposit of a sum could be made at all. These are two legal points urged. In the judgment in Civil Misc. Writ No. 6571 of 1978 and other connected writ petitions, dated June 30, 1980 (supra) the Division Bench held that the notification dated December 31, 1975, enhancing the rate, at which the Sugar Factories were enjoin to place separate funds and the further provision for depositing the amount in the name of Controller of Molasses independently or jointly with the Sugar Factory was bad. It is noteworthy that the complaint relates to breach of Section 10-A of the Act No. 24 of 1964. This provision does not lay for opening any joint account in the name of the Sugar Factory and some Excise Authority. It was so held in the aforesaid writ petitions. It would no doubt appear that there is a provision contained in Section 10-A of the said Act for a separate fund and there is a further provision regarding the rates, laying down that the amount be deposited according to the rates given under Section 10-A or such other amount as the State Government; may notify. The State Government issued the aforesaid notification of December 31, 1975, but that notification stands quashed as per aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench in the writ petitions. Inspite of time having; been allowed to the State Counsel, any other notification has not been pointed out to this Court under which the Commissioner could have passed the order of 1977 directing certain deposits to be made. As held in the Division Bench case, under Section 10-A of the aforesaid Act No. 24 of 1964 any such order could not be passed. When that is the position, in view of the aforesaid judgment, no prosecution could be launched for any contravention disclosed in the complaint, filed before the Judicial Magistrate.
(3.) HON'ble P. N. Bakshi, J., in Criminal Misc. Case No. 7948 of 1978, decided on 22-7-1980, quashed the similar proceedings for the same consideration following the decision of the aforesaid Division Bench of this Court. I, therefore, allow this application and quash the complaint dated 31-12-1977 filed against the applicants, annexed with the affidavit, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate II, Sitapur, and the proceedings relating thereto. Application allowed.;