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

1991 Supreme(Pat) 325

B.N.AGRAWAL
Onkarmal Sharma Alias Onkarmal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

B.N.AGRAWAL, J.

1. This application has been filed for quashing prosecution of the petitioner under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for violation of provision] of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order. 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Unification Order) and Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The occurrence is said to have taken place on 24-1-86 in relation to cotton cloth. It is said that no storage limit has been fixed for the cotton cloth under the Unification Order. As such the Unification Order is not workable in relation to cotton cloth. It has been held in a catena of decisions that if the storage limit is not fixed an accused cannot be prosecuted for violation of the Unification Order. Therefore, prosecution of the petitioner for violation of provision of the Unification Order becomes unwarranted.

3. So far prosecution of the petitioner under Section. 353 of the Penal Code is concerned, according to prosecution case the petitioner has deterred a public servant from discharging his duty as the petitioner was not carrying out the obligation under the provision of the Unification Order. Since the

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