SARBANANDA SARKAR Vs. STATE SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND SUPPLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against a criminal proceeding (E. G. R. No. 19/66), which is pending before Respondent 3, under Rule 125 of the Defence of India Rules, read with para 5 (c) of the West Bengal Rice and Paddy Control Order, 1966. This case was instituted on the complaint of the Inspector of Food and Inspector of Food and Supplies (Respondent No. 5) dated 25th February, 1966, which is at Annexure A. In this complaint it was stated that the Petitioner had stored a large quantity of paddy at his residence, at Bhandijilash within P.S. Tufanganj without obtaining a permit under the said Order and that 67 quintals of paddy were found out from different parts of his premises. Owing to resistance of the inmates of his family to further search, the Petitioner was arrested under the Defence of India Rules. The Petitioner prays for quashing the Criminal Proceedings and restoring the seized paddy to him. upon a declaration that the said Rice and Paddy Control Order is unconstitutional on grounds which will be dealt with by me serially.

(2.) The primary ground urged is that the Order imposes unreasonable restrictions upon the freedoms of property and business guaranteed by Articles 19 (1) (f) (g) and 304 of the Constitution. We must refer to the relevant provisions of the Order in order to appreciate this argument:

(3.) Rule 125 (2) of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 empowered the Central Government as well as a State Government to make an order providing