The provisions of Ss. 16 and 16(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, save the Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948, made under the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, from expiring with the expiry of the latter Act.

Headnote:
ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT - Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948 - Validity - Order made under Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 - Whether saved by Essential Commodities Ordinance, 1955 and Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Interpretation of Ss. 16 and 16(2) of the Act.
Fact of the Case:

The respondents were prosecuted under S. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (X of 1955), read with S. 3 of the Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948, for transporting bales of saries without obtaining a permit from the Textile Controller, Bihar. They contended that the Order ceased to have any legal force after the expiry of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 (XXIV of 1946), under which it was made.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the Order was saved by S. 16 of the Essential Commodities Ordinance, 1955, and S. 16(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and that the prosecution was validly launched against the accused under S. 3 of the Order.
Issues: Whether the Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948, made under the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, was saved by the Essential Commodities Ordinance, 1955, and the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Ss. 16 and 16(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and held that the Order was saved by these provisions. It held that S. 16 of the Ordinance saved the operation of the Order, and that S. 16(2) of the Act gave it a further lease of life.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the prosecution was validly launched against the accused under S. 3 of the Order.

Judgment

SUBBA RAO, J. : This is an appeal by special leave by the State of Bihar against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna quashing the criminal proceedings launched against the respondents in the Court of Munsif-Magistrate, Patna.

2. The two respondents were the proprietors of a firm called M/s. Patna Textiles doing business in cotton at Patna. On 30-8-1955, they despatched two bales of saries to M/s. Hiralal Basudev Prasad, cloth merchants of balia, from Patna Ghat without obtaining a permit from the Textile Controller, Bihar. They were prosecuted under S. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (X of 1955), hereinafter called the Act, read with S. 3 of the Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948, hereinafter called the Order, in the Court of the Munsif-Magistrate, Patna. The respondents filed a petition before the said Munsif-Magistrate praying for their discharge on the ground that the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946(XXIV of 1946), hereinafter called the 1946 Act, whereunder the said Order was made, had been repealed, and therefore, the Order ceased to have any legal force thereafter, and consequently they could not be prosecuted under the expired Order. The Munsif-Magistrate rejected that petition. The Additional Sessions Judge, Patna, after perusing the records transmitted the same to the High Court under S. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with his opinion that the order of the Munsif-Magistrate was wrong and, therefore, it might be set aside with the direction to the Munsif-Magistrate to discharge the accused. The respondents also filed a revision to the High Court against the order of the Munsif-Magistrate. The reference as well as the revision were heard together by Imam J., of the High Court at Patna, and the learned Judge accepting the reference and the revision set aside the order of the Munsif-Magistrate and directed the accused to be discharged. Hence the appeal.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the State contended that the Order made under the 1946 Act was saved under S. 16 of the Essential Commodities Ordinance of 1955, hereinafter called the Ordinance, and S. 16 (2) of the Act, and, therefore, the accused were validly prosecuted under the provisions of the Order. The learned counsel for the respondents argued that the order was not saved under either of the said two sections.

4. To appreciate the contention of the parties, it is necessary to notice the relevant provisions of the 1946 Act, the Order, the Ordinance and the Act.

" Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 .

Section 1 (3): It shall cease to have effect on the twenty-sixth day of January, 1955, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before that date, and S. 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (X of 1897), shall apply upon the expiry of this Act as if it had then been repealed by a Central Act.

Section 3 (1): The Central Government, so far as it appears to it to by necessary or expedient for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity, or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, may by order provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein.

Cotton Textiles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948 .

Section 3: No person shall transport or cause to be transported by rail, road, air, sea or inland navigation any cloth, yarn or apparel except under and in accordance with-

(i) a general permit notified in the Gazette of India by the Textile Commissioner; or

(ii) a special transport permit issued by the Textile Commissioner.

The Essential Commodities Ordinance, 1955 .

Preamble: Whereas the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 (XXIV of 1946), which confers powers to control the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in, certain commodities, expires on the 26th day of January, 1955;

...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ......

the President is pleased to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document