The Essential Commodities Act does not allow prosecution of private individuals for violations; it is intended for the regulation of agents or P.D.S. Dealers for the benefit of the consuming public.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.05.2011 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in Pakribarawan P.S. Case No.28 of 2007, whereby the prayer for discharge under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the petitioner has been rejected.

3. As per the First Information Report, on secret information, the Block Supply Officer with other police officials reached Dumrawan-Baliyari crossing and intercepted the petitioner, who was found in possession of two plastic jerrycans, containing 40 liters each of blue kerosene oil. On being asked about the reason for possessing such huge quantity of kerosene oil, the petitioner is said to have disclosed that the same was purchased from a P.D.S. Dealer for consideration. However, since no paper was produced with respect to the purchase of kerosene oil, the kerosene oil was seized and the petitioner was made accused for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

4. A prayer for discharge on behalf of the petitioner was made on the ground that the petitioner is not a P.D.S. Dealer and the kerosene oil so recovered from his possession was purchased for the purposes of the same being used in a function at the house of the petitioner.

5. The aforesaid prayer of the petitioner was refused on the ground that to prevent black-marketing of kerosene oil in large scale, such a raid was conducted in which the petitioner was nabbed with huge quantity of kerosene oil and he had no satisfactory explanation for possession of the same.

6. It has been settled by several decisions of this Court that no prosecution under the Essential Commodities Act could be launched as against a private person. The petitioner, admittedly, is not a dealer under the Public Distribution System. He has offered his preliminary explanation about the circumstance under which the kerosene oil was so purchased. In the absence of any provision in the Essential Commodities Act for launching prosecution as against a private person, the petitioner cannot be tried for such offence.

7. The Essential Commodities Act has been framed for the benefit of consuming public. For any violation of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act or the Control Orders, promulgated under the authority of the Essential Commodities Act, only the agents or the P.D.S. Dealers could be prosecuted. Kerosene oil, being a controlled item, is governed by a necessary Control Order. However, since the petitioner is not a P.D.S. Dealer, he cannot be tried for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

8. In that view of the matter, the order dated 11.05.2011 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in Pakribarawan P.S. Case No.28 of 2007, whereby the prayer for discharge has been rejected, is set aside and the petitioner stands discharged in terms of Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

9. The application is allowed.