JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Harsh Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, learned A.C. to G.P.-II, appearing for the State.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal prosecution including the First Information Report, in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No. 156 of 2015 (G.R. No. 453 of 2015), registered for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act read with Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella.

3. The prosecution case was lodged by one Yogendra Prasad Sharma, Block Supply Officer, Gamharia against the petitioner with the following allegations:-

On 16.4.15 at 6 A.M. he along with police patrolling party caught a tempo bearing registration No. JH 05AC/8038 while unloading rice (Usna) at the godown of Vijay Saw at Dindli Basti. The tempo was loaded with 20 packets of rice out of which three packets were already unloaded. Regarding 17 bags no evidence could be produced regarding the said rice and the same was brought to the Police Station and their measurement was done on the basis of weight mentioned on the bags. The weight of the bags was found that different bags of different weight. It is alleged that Vinay Saw came at 10 A.M. at the police station and he submitted cash memo and receipt. He produced the cash memo mentioning each bag containing 50 Kg of rice which is different from the weighment taken on the basis of Dukpatti. It is further stated that Vinay Saw disclosed that he had purchased this rise from Vijay @ Rs.1600/-per quintal and cash memo has been issued by Vijay Saw. It is stated that stock register is not maintained. It is stated that on 14.4.15 the stock register shows the purchase of 10 quintals of rice and on 16.4.15 after showing the sale the balance has been shown as Nil. He did not produced document regarding purchase on 14.4.15 and no payment of market fees has been produced. It shows that he is engaged in sale and purchase of PDS articles. The stock register, cash memo and challan and Bazar Samittee produced by Bijay Saw appears to be forge and are manufactured. The rice was seized and a case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act read with Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code was lodged.

4. Mr. Harsh Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the report does not show as to which order made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act has been violated. He further submits that Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act empowers the Central Government for issuing any Control Order for regulating by license, permits or otherwise, the production or manufacture of any essential commodity. He further elaborates his argument by submitting that Section 5 of the Essential Commodities Act delegates power by the Central Government to the State Government to such officers or authorities for issuing any order. He also refers to Sections 3 and 5 of the Essential Commodities Act, the State of Bihar/ Jharkhand issued Bihar Trade Articles (License Unification) Order, 1984 vide GSR 9 of the 19th April, 1984. He further submits that in view of clause-3 of the Unification Order, no dealer was entitled to carry on business of purchase, sale or storage for sale of any trade article without any license. He further elaborates his argument by way of submitting that the Central Government which is the ultimate authority under the Essential Commodities Act was pleased to remove the rice and wheat from the purview of the license, permits and their transportation by a notification dated 15.02.2002. He submits that by the said notification, the provisions of Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 is not applicable in respect of rice and wheat and there is no control order in respect of the business, particularly for rice. He further submits that the rice has been purchased from the agriculture produce marke