HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV 916.w2958.16.doc Date: 2025.03.06 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

17:36:06 +0300 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2958 OF 2013

1. Ravindra Vinayak Deshmukh Age 48 years, Occu.Service Territory Manager (LPG) Uran Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

R/at Meridian Apartments, Palm Beach Road, Sector 6, Nerul, Navi Mumbai …

2. Mr. Sunil Kawadu Dhakate Age 45 years, Occu. Service Territory Coordinator (LPG) Operations Uran, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. R/at BPCL Staff Quarters, Plot No.50, Sector 17, Vashi Navi Mumbai 400 703. …

3. Mr. Mahesh Jivraj Solanki Age 56 years, Occu. Service Manager (L7PG) Operation, Uran, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. R/at 22B, Plot No.403, Tilak Nagar, Chembur, Mumbai 400 089. …

4. Mr. Ashok Balasaheb Lokare Age 43 years, Occu. Service Dy. Manager (LPG) Operations, Uran Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

R/at 904, Orien Tower, Sector 50, Nerul, Navi Mumbai … Petitioners V/s.

1. The State of Maharashtra Through Uran Police Station

2. Shri Govind Kotambe Incharge Supply Inspector of Uran Tahsil Office, Uran Member of the Vigilance Squad … Respondents Mr. Niteen Pradhan with Ms.Shubhada Khot i/b Mr. P. D. Desai and Shambhavi Desai for the Petitioners.

Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Sushant Dudde, PSI, Uran police station present.

CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &

SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 27th FEBRUARY, 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

1. Present Petition is filed by the Territory Manager and Territory Co-ordinator along with Manager and Deputy Manager (Operation) of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (“BPCL”), being aggrieved by registration of C.R.No.3027 of 2012, registered with Uran police station on 7^th December 2012, which has invoked offence punishable under Sections 3, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with Clause 3(4) of the Liquified Petroleum Gas (Regulation, Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000.

2. On 22^nd July 2014, Rule was issued in the Petition and in terms of prayer clause (b), the Investigating Agency was barred from filing the charge-sheet.

3. We have heard Mr.Nitin Pradhan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Prashant Jadhav, learned APP for the Respondent-Authorities.

4. The detail FIR placed on record disclose that the complaint was lodged by the Supply Office of Uran, Mumbai at Uran police station when a raid was conducted by State Level Vigilance Squad, headed by one Ratandeep Gaikwad and upon site inspection, two lacunaes were specifically noted, one being the number of cylinders found in the premises were exceeding by 8655 cylinders, as against the record maintained which indicated total cylinders as 65,118. In addition, it was also found that there were some HPCL cylinders which were lying and the complaint allege that they were illegally filled up at BPCL plant for which accused persons are responsible.

This resulted in registration of FIR by invoking the provisions of Essentials Commodities Act, 1955 as well as Petroleum Order promulgated thereunder.

5. The learned Counsel Mr.Nitin Pradhan has questioned, initiation of the proceedings against the present Petitioners being arrayed as accused on two counts, firstly, as to the authority of the State level Vigilance Squad to visit the premises and secondly, even if assuming for a moment that some cylinders were found to be in excess, what is the offence that has been attracted.

For finding answers, we have turned our attention to the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 which is an Act aimed at control, production, supply and distribution of trade and commerce in the interest of general public.

Section 3 is a provision which empowers the Central Government to control production, supply and distribution of certain essential commodities, Petroleum being one of the commodity which resulted into issuance of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000 in exercise of powers conferred un