AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) IN this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 6.9.1999, passed by the Special Judge, Sahibganj, whereby he has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and also the order dated 4.12.2002 passed by Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal, framing charge against the petitioner under Section 7 of (.tie Essential Commodities Act. On the basis of a written report lodged by the Supply Inspector, Rajmahal, a First information Report was registered against the petitioner and one another, wherein it was alleged that on 19.6.1999, the informant alongwith raiding party. reached the N11 Kothi Ghat and there it was found that the petitioner was loading wheat on a boat of Prasadi Mandal. The petitioner as well as Prasadi Mandal was apprehended. On enquiry, the petitioner admitted that he was the owner of the Wheat, whereas the other accused Prasadi Mandal admitted that the boat belonged to him. On demand, the petitioner could not produce any document relating to the wheat, which was being loaded by him on the boat. Thereafter the godown of the petitioner was also inspected and 'wheat, 'rice' and 'chura' were found to be stored there illegally. Accordingly. the wheat found on the boat, kept at the ghat and the rice and chura etc. found in the godown were seized. It appears that after completion of investigation, the police submitted charge -sheet and on the basis of that, by order dated 6.9.1999, cognizance was taken under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act by the Special Judge, Sahibganj. The petitioner and other accused person who were charge -sheeted, appeared before the learned Special Judge. It appears that by order dated 4.12.2002, the learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, explained the substance of accusation to the accused persons, to which the accused persons denied and claimed to be tried and thereafter the case was fixed for evidence and summons were issued to the prosecution witnesses.
(3.) NOW the petitioner is challenging the order taking cognizance and the criminal prosecution by filing this application.;