K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN all these criminal revision eases, the common question of law that arises for cotlsideration is whether Section 12-AA (1) (e) of the Essential commodities Act, 1955, introduced by the Amending Act of 1981, renders section 11 of the ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 nugatory or inoperative.

( 2 ) THE question arises under the following circumstances:the respondent herein, viz. , the Assistant Director of Agriculture (R), Machilipatnam, filed a complaint in the Court of the Special Judge under Essential commodities Act against each of the petitioners for the alleged offence under clauses 5 (1) and 13 (1) (a) of the Fertiliser (Control) Order, 1957 read with the provisions of the ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955. The case, arising out of each complaint, is numbered separately and the same was taken up for trial. An objection was raised before the lower Court that taking cognizance of the case is illegal as the complaint is taken on file, not on the basis of the police report, as contemplated under Section 12-AA (1) (a) of the Essential commodies Act; but, on the basis of a complaint filed by a public servant, and as the special Court constituted under the Amending Act to try these offences is a Sessions Court, cognizance can be taken by such a Court only when the case is committed, as required under Section 193 Cr. P. C. and that the taking of cognizance by such a Sessions Court, on the basis of the complaint filed by a public servant, is illegal, as it is contry to Section 193 cr. P. C. The lower Court by its order overruled this objection. Questioning the same, these revision cases are filed.

( 3 ) TO resolve the question involved, it is necessary to consider the relevant provisions of the ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as me Act") and also the provisions of the Amending Act of 1981. section 7 of the Act prescribes various penalties, including mprisonment for the contraventions of any order made under Sec. 3. Sec. 11 provides for the cognizance of offences and is in the following terms:-"11. Cognizance of offence : -No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act except on a report in writing of the facts constituting such offence made by a person who is a public servant as defined in Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. "the Act was amended in the year 1981 for a temporary period of five years for dealing more effectively with persons indulging in hoarding and black- marketing of, and profiteering in Essential Commodities, Special provisions nave been made regarding bail and Section 12-A has been substituted and a new Section 12-AA has been added. The relevant portions of Section 12-AA tor the purpose of this case; may be noted. 12-AA. Offences triable by Special Courts . (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code (a) all offences under this Act shall be triable only by the Special court constituted for the area in which the offence has been committed or where there are more Special Courts than one for such area, out such one of them as may be specified in this behalf by the High court. (b)XXX XXX XXX (c)XXX XXX XXX (d)XXX XXX XXX (e) a Special Court may, upon a Persual of police repon of the facts constituting an dffence under this Act take cognizance of that offence witnout the accused being committed to it for trail : (f)XXX XXX XXX on the basis of Clause fe) to Section 12-AA it is contended by the learned counsel tor the petitioner that the amendment introduced is self-contained code itself and the special Court can take cognizance of the offence under the act only on the report filed by the police, as provided under clause (e) of sub-sec. (1) of section 12-AA and not by any other public servant, as provided under section 11. It is a also submitted that, by virtue of amending Act of 1981 which has introduced section 12-AA, section 11 of the Act becomes inoperative and must be deemed to have been impliedly repealed, during the penod w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document