Sunil Kumar Garg, J. - (1.) This petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the accused petitioner against the order dtd. 5/12/2001 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner in Criminal Case No. 196/99 for offence under Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act by which he ordered that now a fresh trial of the case No. 196/99 would be conducted as per the procedure of warrant trial as provided under Section 239 Cr. P.C. from the stage of hearing the arguments on charge.
(2.) It arises in the following circumstances (i) That on 17/1/1994, a FIR (Ex. P/6) was lodged by P.W.7 Hanuman, Enforcement Inspector, Bikaner. (ii) That on the basis of that FIR (Ex. P/6) a case was registered for violation of Rajasthan Food Grains and Other Essential Commodities (Regulation and Distribution) Order, 1976 punishable under Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and a challan was filed against the accused petitioner for the said offence and one more accused person, namely, Girdhari Singh in the month of June, 1994 in the court of Special Judge, EC Act Cases, Bikaner. (iii) That the contents of the offence were read over to the accused persons on 27-7-1994 by the learned Special Judge, EC Act Cases, Bikaner which were denied by the accused persons and after recording the statements of prosecution witnesses, the evidence of the prosecution was closed on 28/4/1998 and statements of accused persons were recor-ded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. on 2/5/1998. (iv) Thereafter through order dtd. 13/7/1999, the case was trans-ferred to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner for trial according to law for the aforesaid offence and at that time, the case was fixed for final arguments. (v) That thereafter on 24/5/2000, an application was moved by the learned APP-I before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate stating that in this case there was violation of Rajasthan Trade Articles (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 (here-in after referred to as the Order of 1980) and not of Order of 1976 and that application filed by the APP-I was allowed through order dtd. 3/8/2000 and fresh contents of the offence were read over to the accused persons on 3/8/2000 and again the case was posted for final arguments. (vi) Thereafter on 23/11/2001, another application was moved by the APP that in this case proceedings of the trial should have been conducted as warrant trial and therefore, now a fresh trial as warrant trial be conducted. (vii) That the learned trial Court through order dtd. 5/12/2001 allowed that application and ordered that now fresh trial be conducted as warrant trial and this order dtd. 5/12/2001 passed by the learned trial Court has been challenged in this misc. petition.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mukesh v. State of Rajasthan, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate be directed to hear the final arguments and dispose of the case on merits.;