Judgment

DUA, J.: - The State of Bihar has appealed to this Court with a certificate of fitness under Article 134 (1) (C) of the Constitution from the judgrnent and order of a learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court dated August 14, 1969 quashing. on revision under Sections 439/561-A, Cr. P. C., the prosecution of Bhagirath Sharma and Radhey Shyam Sharma, the respondents in this Court, for contravention of clauses 3, 4 and 5 of the Bihar Essential Commodities Act - other than Foodgrains Prices and Stocks (Display and Control) Order. 1967 (hereinafter called the Order), pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gaya.

2. According to the prosecution case, on receipt of confidential information that the proprietor of M/s. Auto Spare, Law Road, Gaya, was not properly maintaining the account of Motor Tyres, with the ulterior motive of withholding the supply of the said article to the genuine customers. Shri Ram Nivas Singh, Marketing Officer, Gaya, had, along with two supply Inspectors made a surprise inspection of the firm on May 22, 1969 and found certain irregularities. One of those irregularities was the failure of the firm to display the price list and stock position of Motor Tyres anywhere in their shop in contravention of clause 4 of the Order. On search by the said Marketing Officer, a huge stock of Motor Tyres of different varieties numbering 487 were actually found stored in the inner portion of the shop. In view of the irregularities discovered by the Marketing Officer and the seizure of the stock of Motor Tyres, it was felt that prima facie case had been made out against the partners of the said firm, Shri Bhagirath Sharma and Shri Radhey Shyam Sharma, respondents in this Court, for contravention of clauses 3. 4 and 5 of the Order. Complaint to that effect was accordingly made in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on May 23, 1969. On the same date the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Gaya after perusing the report of the Marketing Officer, took cognisance of the case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and transferred it for disposal to the Court of Shri N. N. Singh, Munsif Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya. It is against this order of the Magistrate that the respondents in this Court approached the Patna High Court, under Sections 439/561-A. Cr. P, C.

3. A learned Single Judge of the High Court after referring to the two relevant items (Nos. 1 and 5) of Schedule I appended to the Order felt bound by an earlier Single Bench decision dated April 20, 1969 of that High Court in Criminal Misc. Case No, 1479 of 1968 (Pat.) holding that Item No. 1 of Schedule I could not be assumed to cover the commodities like Motor Tyres and Motor Tubes though he himself thought that he would have taken a different view, had the matter been res integra. Item No. 5 even according to the learned Single Judge s own view could not cover the Motor Tyres and Motor Tubes. Being, However, bound by the earlier decision he held the prosecution of the proprietors of the firm to be misconceived. The prosecution was accordingly quashed.

4. In this Court, our attention has been drawn to Item No. 1 in Schedule I of the Order. This item reads:-

"1. Component parts and accessories of automobiles."

It is contended that this item must cover Tyres and Tubes of Motor Cars and Motor Cycles . According to the argument forcibly pressed on behalf of the State of Bihar, Tyres and Tubes of automobiles are their essential component parts and the earlier Single Bench decision of the Patna High Court (in Criminal Misc. Case No, 1479 of 1968 (Pat.)) followed as a binding precedent in the present case should be held to have been wrongly decided. The other item to which reference was made by the High Court in the impugned judgment is Item No, 5 which reads: -

"5. Cycle tyres and tubes (including cycle rickshaw tyres end tubes)."

The submission that this item should be held to cover Motor Tyres and Motor Tubes was rejected by the High Court. Before u