AMARESHWAR SAHAY J. - (1.) In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 07.06.1999 passed by the Special Judge, E.C. Act -cum -IVth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, by which the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, for dropping the proceeding as against the petitioner was rejected. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding initiated against him on the basis of the F.I.R. i.e. Doranda P.S. Case No. 46 of 1999, registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, for violation of Clause 3 of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984.
(2.) THE informant -Block Supply Officer, Namkum lodged the first information report on 20.02.1999, against the petitioner and one another, under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, alleging therein that on 20.02.1999, he reached at the residence of the petitioner and in course of inspection, it was found that hundred bags containing hundred quintals of Sugar and 2740 liters of Kerosene Oil were stored at the residential premises of the petitioner. On demand made by the informant, the Petitioner who was present there at that time, failed to produce any paper in respect of the aforesaid Sugar and Kerosene Oil kept in his residential premises. On interrogation, the petitioner is said to have disclosed that on 19.02.1999 one Jogendra Singh a fair price shop dealer came to his residence and told him that since there was no space in his godown to keep those articles i.e. Sugar and Kerosene Oil which belonged to him and, therefore, he requested the petitioner to keep the said Sugar and Kerosene Oil in his Godown on the assurance that he would take back those articles within two or three days. It was alleged that for the purpose of storage and for sale and purchase of more than five bags of Sugar a licence was required to be taken but the petitioner had no such licence to store such quantity of Sugar. Similarly for storage of more than 20 liters of Kerosene Oil, licence was required to be taken but the petitioner was not having the said licence and as such, it was alleged that the petitioner had contravened the provisions contained in clause 3 of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984. The police after completing the investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner, under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act on 22.04.1999. On the basis of the said chargesheet, it appears that the learned Special Judge had taken cognizane of the offences under Section 7 of the E.C. Act against the petitioner.
(3.) IT further appears that at the stage of explaining the substance of acquisition to the accused as envisaged under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C., a petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner, before the Special Judge to the effect that since no case for explaining the substance of acquisition (sio -accusation?) is made out against the petitioner and, therefore, the criminal prosecution against him be dropped.;