The provisions of Section 12-AA of the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act, 1981 do not override the provisions of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the proceedings do not vitiate if the investigation is not completed within six months as per sub-clause (5) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

NIRMAL SINGH, J.

1. The Petitioner Anil Kumar, a food grain dealer of Talwandi Bhai, is being prosecuted in Case FIR No. 14 dated 26-2-1997, Police Station Ghall Khurd, District Ferozepur, registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short "the Act") read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on 31 -10-1996 he had stored 36732 quintals of wheat without licence and thereby had contravened Clause 7 of the Punjab Trade Articles (Licensing Order) 1992 framed under Section 3 of the Act.

2. The petitioner has moved this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the aforesaid FIR and the subsequent proceedings pending in the Court of Special Court, Ferozepur. His case is that the offences under the Act shall be tried by the Special Court in summary way as laid down under Section 12-AA(1) of the Act and provisions of Sections 262 and 265 (both inclusive) shall be applicable to such trial and that when the offence is to be tried summarily the investigation is to be concluded as per the provisions of Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Investigation in his case was not completed within six months and report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was presented after the expiry of six months and thus as per the provisions of Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the proceedings are vitiated on the ground of limitation.

3. The respondent has raised preliminary objection asserting that challan was already filed in Court on 9-9-2002 and charge has also been framed against the petitioner and, therefore, he has an alternative remedy to file a revision against the order of framing of charge.

4. Mr. D. S. Bali, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Sec. 12-A of the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act, 1981 (for short the "Special Act") Special Court was constituted with effect from 1-9-1982 which was enforced initially for a period of five years but was extended from time to time up to 31 -8-1997 and thereafter, the Essential Commodities Special Provisions Ordinance, 1997 was promulgated which lapsed and therefore, the Special Court ceased to existed thus, all cases registered under the Act are to be tried by a Magistrate having jurisdiction over the subject-matter as it was being done prior to the Special Act. According to the learned Senior Counsel this proposition stands well settled in State of Tamil Nadu V/s. V. Paramasiva Pandian. 2002 CAR 360 (SC).

4.1 Reliance was also placed on a Division Bench Judgment of our Court in State of Haryana V/s. Rajinder Singh, (1991) 2 Pun LR 540 and Bhim Sain V/s. State of Haryana, (2002) 1 Rec Cri R 596.

5. In Bhim Sain, supra, it was held by a learned single Judge as under :

"Section 12-AA(l){a) of the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act, 1981 , clearly lays down that all offences under this Act shall be triable only by the Special Court constituted for the area In which the offence has been committed. Section 12-AA(l)(f) further provides that all offences under this Act shall be tried in a summary way. In this view of the matter, it was incumbent upon the Investigating Officer to seek Special permission of the Court for extension of time for investigating as envisaged under Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Admittedly, no. application was filed by the Investigating Officer making out a case for extension of time for investigation beyond the period of six months. Thus, finding no infirmity in the impugned order of the learned Sessions Judge, Narnaul dated 15/10/1984, we dismiss the appeal being without any merit."

6. A lurking doubt cropped up about the correctness of the view expressed in Rajinder Singh (supra) and Bhim Sains case (supra) and thus this Full Bench was constituted in which following questions arise for adjudication :

(1) Whether the provisions of Section 12- AA of the Act override the provisions of Sec