HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Ram Nandan Prasad, J.
Tarapado Ghosh
Gajadhar Ram and anr.
Bidya Sharma - Petitioners
Vs.
The State of Bihar (in all cases) - Opposite parties
Cr. Misc. 9828, 10352/85 with 2247/86
Decided on: 31.8.1990
ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT - JURISDICTION - SECTION 3, 5, 7, 12AA - CONTROL ORDER - RAILWAY EMPLOYEES - SECTION 197 CRPC - SANCTION - SUMMARY OF THE COURT'S ANALYSIS OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SPECIAL JUDGE, THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CONTROL ORDER, THE VALIDITY OF THE COLLECTOR'S INSTRUCTIONS, THE OFFENCES ALLEGED, AND THE REQUIREMENT OF SANCTION FOR PROSECUTION OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, railway employees and agents, were charged with forgery and violations of the Essential Commodities Act for booking consignments of Arhar Dal from Chapra Railway Station to various destinations in South India without proper authorization. The Collector had issued instructions to restrict the movement of pulses from Bihar, but there was no Control Order under the Act in effect at the time.
Finding of the Court:
The Special Judge did not have jurisdiction to try the case because the alleged offenses occurred before the creation of the Special Judge's court under Section 12AA of the Act. There was no Control Order under the Act restricting the movement of pulses from Bihar at the time of the alleged offenses, so the petitioners did not violate any such order. The Collector's instructions were not statutory orders and could not give rise to any offenses. The railway employees were acting in discharge of their official duty and could not be prosecuted without prior sanction from the competent authority.
Issues: 1. Whether the Special Judge had jurisdiction to try the case. 2. Whether the petitioners violated any Control Order under the Act. 3. Whether the Collector's instructions were valid and enforceable. 4. Whether the railway employees could be prosecuted without prior sanction.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Special Judge did not have jurisdiction because the alleged offenses occurred before the creation of the Special Judge's court under Section 12AA of the Act. 2. There was no Control Order under the Act restricting the movement of pulses from Bihar at the time of the alleged offenses, so the petitioners did not violate any such order. 3. The Collector's instructions were not statutory orders and could not give rise to any offenses. 4. The railway employees were acting in discharge of their official duty and could not be prosecuted without prior sanction from the competent authority.
Final Decision: The entire proceedings in G. R. Case No. 2543/82 pending in the court of the Special Judge, E. C. Act, Saran, were quashed.
Ram Nandan Prasad, J. - The prayer in all the three applications is to quash the entire proceedings of G. R. Case No. 2543/82 / T. R. Case No. 33/85 relating to Chapra G. R. P. S. Case No. 70 dt. 7-10-82) pending in the court of the Special Judge (E. C. Act), Saran, at Chapra and as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. The Inspector of Police, C.I.D. (Food), Chapra, filed a written report at Chapra G. R. P. S. on 7-10-82. On the basis of which the Chapra G. R. P. S. Case, No. 70/82 was instituted. The written report states that the informant while engaged in the investigation on Chapra G. R. P. S. Case No.1 dt. 1-11-78 detected that during the period April to June, 1978, 23, 232 quintals of Arhar Dal had been booked from Chapra Railway Station under 387 railway receipts to different places in South India. It is alleged in the written report that these bookings had been done by so called agents of 1411 firms which were bogus and which were not actually in existence and which neither had licence under the Foodgrains Licensing Order nor were registered in the Commercial Taxes Department. The allegation in the written report is that the bookings of huge quantity of Arhar Dal during the aforesaid period was in contravention of the direction of the Collector as contained in his letter no. 1758 supply dt. 9-8-77 whereby he asked the railway authorities to note down the full particulars and address and licence number of persons and firms booking the goods from Chapra Railway Station to different destinations in the country. Admittedly, at the relevant time, Tarapado Ghosh (petitioner in Cr. misc. 9828/85) was posted as the Goods clerk at the Chapra Junction Railway Station goods godown, and the Gajadhar Ram and Rameshwar, Ram (petitioners in Cr. misc. 10352/85) were posted respectively as Goods Superintendent Grade-1 and Goods Superintendent Grade-2 at the Chapra Railway Station and the allegations against these railway employees are that they in conspiracy and collusion with the persons who acted as agents of the fake firms booked the consignments of Arhar Dal to various destinations in South India during the relevant period. Bidya Sharma and Upendra Sharma (petitioners in Cr. misc. 2247/86) are said to be two of such agents. After completing investigation the police submitted charge-sheet against all these petitioners and after taking cognizance the learned Special Judge framed charges under Section 468 of the India Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the aforesaid five petitioners after rejecting the petition in which prayer had been made for discharge on the ground that no offence at all had been made out against them.
3. The following contentions have been raised on behalf of the petitioners:-
(i) The Special Judge has no jurisdiction to try the cases under the Essential Commodities Act of a period prior to 1-9-82 because it is from that date that the Special Judge's court under Section 12AA of the Act was created by amending Act, 18/81.
(ii) At the relevant time there was no notification or direction restricting, the movement of pulses (Arhar) from Bihar to any other State either under the Act or under any other law. The goods were booked by complying with the rules and regulations of the railway and there is no allegation that any provision of the Railways Act or any rules governing the booking of consignments has been violated.
(iii) The Collector had no jurisdiction to issue any direction regarding booking of consignments of pulses from Chapra to outside destination and in any view of the matter non-compliance of the same cannot give rise to any offence under the Act. Further all the railway receipts in question were validly and genuinely written out and hence there is no question of committing any forgery in writing out the railway receipts or other documents relating to the booking of the consignments. Unde
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.