- (1.) THE present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioners for quashment of the entire criminal proceeding against them in Kuru P.S. Case NO.118 of 2007, corresponding to G.R. No. 494 01 2007 for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.
(2.) THE prosecution story in short was that the Supply Inspector, Kuru alongwith the police party intercepted a Truck No. UP -63F -9535, which was carrying wheat bags but on demand no paper with regard to transportation of wheat or its ownership was produced. The driver of the said truck. who was apprehended at the spot, explained that papers would be provided at Lohardaga by the petitioners. The truck with the wheat bags loaded thereon was seized on the instance of the lnformant -Supply Inspector after institution of the case for the offence under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act against the petitioners and others with the allegation that the informant had reason to believe that wheat bags were being carried on the truck belonged to some projects of the Government and that the same were to be sold in the black -market. Mr. Nilesh Kumar, the learned counsel submitted that the prosecution of the petitioners was not maintainable for want of any alleged violation of specific Control Order or Unification Order as framed under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act so as to attract punishment under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Admittedly, the petitioners were neither licensee nor in any manner connected with any fair price shop. He further pointed out that restriction from the storage and transportation of wheat, rice and other food -grains have been lifted . by Notification No. 559 dated 24.4.2002 issued by the Government of Jharkhand, Department of Food, Civil Supply and Commerce. Finally Mr. Kumar submitted that FIR does not disclose any offence as such against the petitioners and therefore, FIR itself is not maintainable which is liable to be quashed as against the petitioners.
(3.) MR Hatim, the learned A.P.P, appearing on tehalf of the State failed to satisfy the court with reference to violation of any Control Order so as to attract an offence under Section 7 of the E.C. Act alleged to be committed by the petitioners.;