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

2015 Supreme(Jhk) 457

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.
Rajendra Prasad Poddar – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Anr. – Opposite Parties
Cr.M.P. No. 168 of 2003
Decided On : 6/2/2015

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. M.L.K. Chitra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party No. 1 : APP

The central legal point established is that the provisions of section 24 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985, do not apply to weights and measures used exclusively for domestic purposes without any commercial transactions.

Headnote:

Standards of Weights and Measures - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Section 47 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 - Section 24

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings against them under section 47 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985, for alleged violation of section 24 of the Act regarding re-verification of weights and measures.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the weights and measures in question were used exclusively for domestic purposes, not for any commercial transaction, and thus, the provisions of section 24 of the Act did not apply. The court allowed the application and quashed the criminal proceedings.

Issues: Violation of section 24 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985, and the applicability of section 47 for the alleged offence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the provisions of section 24 and emphasized that re-verification of weights and measures is not necessary for items used exclusively for domestic purposes. It relied on the explanation to section 24 and the absence of commercial transactions to conclude that the provisions of section 24 did not apply in this case.

Final Decision: The application was allowed, and the entire criminal proceedings, including the order taking cognizance under section 47 of the Act, were quashed.

JUDGMENT :-

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including the order dated 30.5.2001, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in W.M. Case No. 498 of 2001, by which cognizance for the offence under section 47 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 (The Act for short) has been taken against the petitioner.

3. The prosecution story as would appear from the complaint instituted by the opposite party no. 2, who is the Inspector, Weights and Measures, is that the weights and measures in E.J. Area, Pathardih Colliery of M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited have not been reverified up to 30.6.2000 as required under Sub section 2 of section 24 of the Act.

4. After submission of the aforesaid complaint, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad vide order dated 30.5.2001 was pleased to take cognizance for the offence punishable under section 47 of the Act.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the order taking cognizance has submitted that the learned court below had taken the cognizance in a mechanical manner without there being any application of judicial mind. He has further submitted that the weights and measures, for which the complaint has been instituted, were for the internal use of Pathardih Colliery having no commercial transaction and as such section 24 of the Act has no applicability. In this context, he has referred to a judgment of the Hon'ble Patna High Court delivered in C.W.J.C. No. 6242 of 1988.

6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has submitted that on inspection, violations were found with respect to the provisions of the Act and accordingly learned Chief Judicial Magistrate did not commit any illegality in taking cognizance under section 47 of the said Act.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it is to be seen as to whether there has been any violation so as to prosecute the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 47 of the Act.

8. Section 47 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 reads as follows:-

"47.Penalty for contravention of section 24._Whoever, being required by section 24 to present any weight or measure for verification or re-verification, omits or fails, without any reasonable cause to do so, shall be punished with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, and, for the second or subsequent offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and also with fine.

9. Since section 47 is a penal provision for violation of the provisions of section 24 of the Act, it would be necessary to refer to section 24 of the Act.

10. Section 24 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 reads as follows:-

"24. Verification and stamping of weights or measures.-(1) Every person having any weight or measure in his possession, custody or control in circumstances indicating that such weight or measure is being, or is intended or likely to be, used by him in any transaction or for industrial production or for protection, shall, before putting such weight or measure into such use, have such weight or measure verified at such place and during such hours as the Controller may, by general or special order, specify in this behalf (hereinafter referred to as the specified place or specified time), on payment of such fees as may be prescribed.

(2) Every weight or measure referred to in sub-section (1) shall be re-verified at such periodical intervals as may be prescribed.

Explanation. - For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that no periodical re-verification shall be necessary is relation to any weight or measure which is used exclusively for domestic purposes.

(3) Every inspector shall, for the purpose of verification of any weight or measure attend the specified place (with the local limit of his jurisdiction) at the specified time and verify eve









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top