Allowed

Atyus Ranjan @ Athioush Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC21 Jun 2019CR. MISC./4589/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging a summons under the Essential Commodities Act. The court held that since rice was not declared an essential commodity in the schedule, the application of Section 7 was impermissible, and the order was set aside. Petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order of cognizance summoning the petitioner is set aside and the petition is allowed.

Atyus Ranjan @ Athioush Ranjan Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4589 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2012 Thana- DUMRAO District- Buxar

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Atyus Ranjan @ Athioush Ranjan Son of Manoj Kumar @ Banarshi Singh @ Banarsi Sah, resident of Village- Prana Bhojpur, P.S.- Dumraon Naya Bhojpur, District- Buxar.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

The State Of Bihar ===================	Versus ... . =====================	.. Opposite Party/s ==============
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s :	Mr.Anil Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : ===================	Mr.Sri Amitesh Kumar =====================	==============

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶8

4 21-06-2019

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶10

learned APP.

¶11

Petitioner has challenged order dated 09.12.2013 whereby and whereunder petitioner Atyus Ranjan @ Athioush Ranjan along with others has been summoned to face trial for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the EC Act by SDJM, Buxar in connection with Dumraon (Naya Bhojpur) P.S. Case no.79/2012, G.R. No.500/2012.

¶12

C.O., Dumraon conducted raid at a premises where, as has been alleged the rice bag containing monogram of Indian Fertilizer Ltd. (Bhartiya Khad Nigam) were being loaded over tractor and trolly whereupon, construed that aforesaid rice were taken to open market for sale. Furthermore, it has also been disclosed that while vehicle laden with rice bags was seized, the empty bags were also seized.

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4589 of 2017(4) dt.21-06-2019 2/4

¶14

After registration of the case investigation commenced and concluding the same, charge sheet has been submitted followed by the order impugned, subject matter of instant petition.

¶15

From the record, it is evident that petitioner was not at all present at the spot. His identification has been at an initial stage as the owner of the tractor and trolly but, during course of investigation, it is evident that one Om Prakash Gupta has been identified to be the owner of the tractor and trolly. Apart from this, from the case diary, it is evident that none alleged anything against the petitioner.

¶16

Application of section 7 of the EC Act is always permissible on account of violation of Section 3. Section 3 prescribes the modalities governing the movement of essential commodity so identified by way of gazette notification in accordance with Section 2A of the Act. For better appreciation Section 2A of the Act is quoted below:

¶17

[2A. Essential commodities declaration, etc.- (1) For the purposes of this Act, "essential commodity" means a commodity specified in the Schedule.

¶18

(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), the Central Government may, if it is satisfied that it is necessary so to do in the public interest and for reasons to be specified in the notification published in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule so as to—

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4589 of 2017(4) dt.21-06-2019 3/4

¶20

(a) add a commodity to the said Schedule;

¶21

(b) remove any commodity from the said Schedule, in consultation with the State Governments.

¶22

(3) Any notification issued under subsection (2) may also direct that an entry shall be made against such commodity in the said Schedule declaring that such commodity shall be deemed to be an essential commodity for such period not exceeding six months to be specified in the notification:

¶23

Provided that the Central Government may, in the public interest and for reasons to be specified, by notification in the Official Gazette, extend such period beyond the said six months.

¶24

(4) The Central Government may exercise its powers under sub-section (2) in respect of the commodity to which Parliament has power to make laws by virtue of Entry 33 in List III in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.

¶25

(5) Every notification issued under subsection (2) shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is issued, before both Houses of Parliament.]

¶26

As per schedule, it is evident that rice is not

¶27

incorporated therein. For better appreciation the essential commodity so identified under the schedule is quoted below:

¶28

THE SCHEDULE

¶29

[See Section2-A] Essential Commodities

¶30

(1) drugs.

¶31

Explanation.-For the purposes of this Schedule, “drugs” has the meaning assigned to it in clause (b) of Section 3 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940);

¶32

(2) fertilizer, whether inorganic, organic or mixed;

¶33

(3) foodstuffs, including edible oilseeds and oils;

¶34

(4) hank yarn made wholly from cotton;

¶35

(5) petroleum and petroleum products;

¶36

(6) raw jute and jute textiles;

¶37

(7) (i) seeds of food-crops and seeds of fruits and vegetables;

¶38

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4589 of 2017(4) dt.21-06-2019 4/4

¶39

(ii) seeds of cattle fodder; and (iii) jute seeds; [(iv) cotton seed.]

¶40

That being so, the order of cognizance relating to the petitioner happens to be bad consequent thereupon, the order impugned relating to the petitioner is hereby set aside. Petition is allowed.

¶41

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)

¶42

Prakash Narayan U T

Atyus Ranjan @ Athioush Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atyus Ranjan @ Athioush Ranjan 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

Noman Ansari and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Khursheed Anwar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Ganga Yadav @ Ganga Ghosh Vs The State of Bihar

Gulcharan Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Jyoti Devi Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Arbind Choubey @ Arbind Kumar Chaubay Vs The State Of Bihar