Uma Charan Lal vs State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar, J.—The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by filing the present petition, had prayed for quashing of an order dated 28.2.1994, whereby Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Nawadah, had taken cognizance of offence u/s 7 of the Essential Commodities Act in Special Case No. 34 of 2000. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of an order, whereby the learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, had directed for issuance of summon against the petitioner. At the time of hearing of the present petition, Shri D.N. Tiwary has confined his prayer to the extent for quashing of order dated 14.2.2000, which was passed by learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Nawadah for summoning the petitioner, on the ground that on the date of passing of order, the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions)Act had already become inoperative and as such the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act was not authorized to function as Special Judge and pass any order in view of number of judgments passed by this Court. This Court, in Cr. Misc. No. 617 of 2000 and other analogous cases, had considered the order relating to cognizance passed by Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act after 8.7.1998, i.e. the date when the Act in question had ceased its operation.

In the present case, Dr. Mayanand Jha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, has not disputed the fact that on the date of passing of the order dated 14.2.2000, the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act was not in operation.

In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, the order dated 14.2.2000 passed by Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Nawadah is hereby set aside and matter is remitted back to the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, who is exercising power under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act.

With above observation and direction, the petition stands allowed.

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all the points, which have been raised in the present case as well as any other point, if available at appropriate stage.< /p>