CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8274 OF 1999
-------
In the matter of applications under section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure.
——-
KHEW KARAN SHARMA @ KHEM KARAN SHARMA
son of Sri Roopchand Sharma, resident of Mill Road,
P.S.Khagaria, Dist.-Khagaria
………. …….Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR ….. ……..Opp. Party.
——
With
Cr.Misc. No.7985 oF 2000
——
GULAB CHAND SHARMA son of late Roopchand Sharma,
resident of Mill Road, P.S.-Khagaria, Dist.-Khagaria.
………. ……Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR …… ………Opp. Party
——-
For the petitioner in both the cases: Mr. D.N.Tiwari
For the State in Cr. Misc. No.8274/1999: Mr. A.M.P.Mehta,A.P.P.
For the State in Cr.Misc.No7985/2000: Mr.Anuj Kr.Srivastava,A.P.P.
——-
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR
——–
Rakesh Kumar,J. In both the cases order of cognizance dated 19.2.1999
passed by Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Khagaria in
Khagaria P.S. Case No.188 of 1998 is under challenge and, as
such, both the cases are being disposed of by this common order.
2. It is not in dispute that cognizance order was
passed by Special Judge, E.C.Act, Khagaria after Essential
Commodities (Special Provision) Act had come to an end. The
operation of provision of Essential Commodities (Special
Provision) Act, 1981 was finally ceased with effect from 8.7.1998
and in the present case order of cognizance was obviously passed
on 19.2.1999 i.e. after the end of the operation of Essential
2
Commodities (Special Provision) Act,1981.
3. Accordingly, both the petitions are hereby
disposed of in terms of the order dated 7.7.2010 passed in Cr.
Misc. No.716 of 2000 and other analogus cases in which
following order was passed:
“Accordingly, all the aforesaid orders of
cognizance under challenge are hereby set aside
on the ground of absence of jurisdiction.
However, in terms of order dated 3.5.2010
passed in Cr. Misc. No.15851 of 1999 and
other analogus cases, the matter is remitted
back to the concerned area Magistrate having
jurisdiction to try Essential Commodities Act
cases as per law.
However, it is made clear that the petitioners
would be at liberty to raise all other points, if
required, at an appropriate stage.
The aforesaid petitions are allowed to the
aforesaid extent and the matter is remitted back
to the appropriate court i.e. court of
C.J.M./S.D.J.M. at the concerned place for
expeditious action.”
(Rakesh Kumar,J.)
Patna High Court
The 16th July,2010
Md.S./NAFR.