- (1.) Both these writ applications arise out of the same F. I. R and as such, they are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) In Cr. W. J. C No. 32 of 2000-R the petitioner has challenged the seizure of 79 bags of wheat from the go-down of this petitioner and 17 bags of wheat from truck bearing registration no. OR-02-3188, in connection with Golmuri P. S Case no. 207 of 1999 corresponding to G. R No. 2171 of 1999, through the seizure list contained in Annexure 2. Whereas in Cr. W. J. C No. 35 of 2000-R, the said petitioner has challenged the criminal prosecution, initiated against him under Section 7 of the E. C. Act on the basis of the said seizure.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a very short question of law is involved in these writ applications i. e. on the relevant date of seizure i. e. , on 19.12.1999, there was no control order in force with respect to wheat. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards Annexure-8 which has been brought on record through supplementary affidavit filed in Cr. W. J. C No. 35 of 2000-R, which is an order dated 23.2.2006 passed in confiscation case no. 12 of 2000-01 by the Deputy Commissioner, Jamshedpur, in the confiscation proceeding with respect to the wheat in question. In the said order, the confiscation proceeding was dropped in view of the fact that there was no control order with respect to wheat on the date of seizure. Learned counsel has accordingly, submitted that the entire seizure, as well as, the criminal prosecution initiated against the petitioner under Section 7 of the E. C Act, are absolutely illegal and void ab initio and the same cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.;