Dismissed

Ramadhar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC12 Oct 2017CR. MISC./11052/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioner's application to quash the cognizance order. Finding that the petitioner lacked a valid license for fertilizer storage at the time of the raid, the Court held that the ingredients of the offence under the Essential Commodities Act were made out and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing the cognizance order dismissed; trial court directed to proceed expeditiously.

Ramadhar Rai Vs The State Of Bihar — Patna HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11052 of 2013

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -286 Year- 2011 Thana -DARIYAPUR District- - Saran

¶4

=========================================================== Ramadhar Rai, son of Raghuni Rai, resident of Village Darihara Chaturbhuj, P.S. Dariyapur, District Saran

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

.... .... Opposite Party

¶9

=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

¶10

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 12-10-2017

¶11

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶12

Counsel for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks quashing of the cognizance order dated 12.7.2012 passed by the learned CJM Chapra in Dariyapur PS Case No. 286 of 2011, taking cognizance of he offence under Secvtion 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

¶14

The facts of the case as narrated in the written information by the informant Block Agriculture Officer is that after receiving information that the petitioner is running a fertilizer shop without licence, raiding team was constituted comprising of several officials and the shop of the petitioner was opened and 200 bags of fertilizer, 17 bags of DAP, seeds of wheat, weighing instrument and weight of different capacity was received. It is further alleged that storage of fertilizer without having licence and it was kept for black-

¶15

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11052 of 2013 dt.12-10-2017

¶16

¶17

marketing. It is also stated that the petitioner had applied for renewal of the licence but still it was in the process.

¶18

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner assails the cognizance order on the ground that no ingredient of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act is made out in this case as the petitioner was having a licence. The same had expired and thereafter he had filed for renewal of the licence and it was pending before the authorities concerned. Learned Counsel for the petitioner refers to Annexure 2 of the application, a certificate of registration for carrying on business of selling fertilizers in the State of Bihar issued by the District Agriculture Officer, Saran Chapra which was valid only up to 31.3.2010. It is further submitted that there is no allegation that the petitioner was found selling the fertilizers in the black market. So no prima facie offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act is attracted as there is no violation of any Order under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act.

¶19

Contrary to that, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the licence of the petitioner had already lapsed one year eight months back and at the time of raid there was no licence for storage purpose which is mandatory.

¶20

Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the records, it is apparent that at the time of raid, on the basis of which the present case was instituted, the petitioner was not having

¶21

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11052 of 2013 dt.12-10-2017

¶22

¶23

any licence or certificate by the appropriate authority to run a business of selling fertilizers or for storage of fertilizers. Earlier licence was possessed by the petitioner but its validity had lapsed much before approximately one year eight months back. Licence is required for selling and storage of fertilizers under the provisions of Fertilizers Control Order, 1985. So storage of fertilizers without licence by the petitioner is in violation of Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act which makes out an offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. So it is not a case that no ingredient of the offence is made out. Hoverer, it is made clear that the observations made in this judgment is not expression of merit of the case, it only relates to the cognizance order.

¶24

So, a prima facie case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act being made out against the petitioner the application stands dismissed. The trial court is directed to proceed with the trial expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶25

(Arun Kumar, J.)

¶26

Snkumar/-

¶27

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
UploadingDate	17.10.2017
Transmission Date	17.10.2017

Ramadhar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramadhar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manju Devi Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Amit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Munita Devi Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Prahalad Giri Vs The State Of Bihar

Sri Kumar @ Neelam Kumar Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Anil Kumar Sah @ Anil Sah Vs The State Of Bihar