- (1.) This is an application filed by the State to revise the Order passed by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Mr. M. M. Dhruv, on April 29, 1969 discharging all the four accused u/s. 251A(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of an offence u/s. 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 with which they were charged, as well as of the substantive offence under the said Section 7 of the latter Act.
(2.) I must, at the outset, state the facts necessary for the purpose of disposing of this Revision Application. The first accused company is a textile mill which manufactures, amongst other things, Dhotis of a brand called "Paramsukh." The second accused is the President of the Executive Committee of the mill and is in overall charge of the production of the mill and controls its day-to-day working. The third accused is the Vice-President (Works) and controls the production of cloth manufactured by the mill and is authorised to sign the statutory returns required to be submitted by the mill to the Textile and Excise Authorities. The fourth accused was, at the material time, i.e., between October 20, 1964 and June 25, 1965, the Resident Executive of M/s. Udyog Services Ltd. as well as of M/s Shree Services and Trading Company which were working as liason agency between the office of the Textile Commissioner and the first accused mill.
(3.) Cotton and woollen textiles are included in the definition of "essential commodity" contained in Sec. 2 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and Section 8 (1) of the said Act empowers the Central Government, if it is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity and availability at fair prices, "by Order" to provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein. Sub-section (2)(a) of Section 8 authorizes, in particular, the Central Government by an order made under Sub-section (1) thereof to regulate the production or manufacture of any essential commodity. Sub-section (6) of Section 8 lays down that every order made under the said section by the Central Government must be laid before both the Houses of Parliament as soon as possible. Sec. 4 of the said Act provides that an order made u/s. 3 may confer powers and impose duties upon the Central Government, or the State Government, or officers and authorities of either of the said Governments, may contain directions to them in regard to the exercise of any such powers or the discharge of any such duties. The next section of the Act which must be referred to is Section 7 under which the accused in this case are alleged to have committed the offence in question. It enacts that if any person contravenes any order made under the said Sec. 3, he is to be punished with imprisonment and fine as specified therein. Sec. 10 of the Act provides that if the person contravening an order made under Section 3 be a company, every person who at the time of that contravention was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company itself, is to be deemed guilty of the contravention and punishable accordingly, subject to the proviso that no such person is liable to punishment if he proves that the contravention took place without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent such contravention.;