SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Pat) 151

S.SHAMSUL HASAN, S.S.SANDHAWALIA, P.S.SAHAY
Madan Mohan Upadhya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

S.S.Sandhawalia, J.

1. The two significant questions which fall for determination in this reference to the Full Bench may be precisely formulated in the following terms:

(i) Whether Sec.10 (1) of the Essential Commodities Act inflexibly requires the incorporation of the words "was in charge of and was responsible to the firm for the conduct of the business of the firm"-in all complaints a partner of the firm for offences in contravention of the said Act ?

(ii) Whether Sec.10 (2) of the Act aforesaid necessarily mandates the incorporation of the allegation that the offence was committed with the consent or connivance or was attributable to the neglect on the part of the partner of the firm in the complaint itself ?

2. The facts may be noticed with the stricktest brevity in so far as they are relevant to the two pristinely legal questions aforesaid. The four petitioners are admittedly partners of the firm named and styled as M/s. Nalanda Trading Stores, Bakhtiarpur carrying on the business of a cement selling agency thereat. On the basis of a complaint (Annexure-1) made by Shri Basistha Narayan Singh, General Secretary of the District Janta Party alleging serious irregulariti



















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top