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

2014 Supreme(Pat) 638

ASHUTOSH KUMAR
Arvind Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Indradeo Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party: Mr. K. Kishore, A.P.P.

ORDER

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.05.2011 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in Pakribarawan P.S. Case No.28 of 2007, whereby the prayer for discharge under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the petitioner has been rejected.

3. As per the First Information Report, on secret information, the Block Supply Officer with other police officials reached Dumrawan-Baliyari crossing and intercepted the petitioner, who was found in possession of two plastic jerrycans, containing 40 liters each of blue kerosene oil. On being asked about the reason for possessing such huge quantity of kerosene oil, the petitioner is said to have disclosed that the same was purchased from a P.D.S. Dealer for consideration. However, since no paper was produced with respect to the purchase of kerosene oil, the kerosene oil was seized and the petitioner was made accused for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

4. A prayer for discharge on behalf of the petitioner was made on the ground that the petitioner is not a P.D.S. Dealer and the kerosene oil so recovered from







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top