Karnataka High Court
State vs Abdul Razak Mohamed Saheb on 20 July, 1988
Equivalent citations: ILR1988KAR3175, 1988(2)KARLJ453
ORDER Patil, J.
1. The Special Judge, Belgaum by his order dated 24-8-1987, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 167(5) Cr.P.C. read with Section 12AA(c) of the Essential Commodities Act (for short 'the Act'), following decision of this Court in ISWARAPPA MAGUNDAPPA ARIBENCHI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, having directed to stop further investigation, on failure to conclude the investigation within six months, the State has come up in this revision questioning the legality and correctness of the order so passed by the Special Judge.
2. Although it would appear, the Police had submitted a charge-sheet, but after the lapse of 6 months, and without any request for extending the time for completing the investigation till the date of the submission of the charge-sheet.
3. Mr. C.H. Jadhav, learned Government Pleader appearing for the State relied upon a decision of this Court in GADAG CO-OPERATIVE TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, and submitted that the offences under the Act being punishable with imprisonment for 7 years and the offences being warrant case within the meaning of Section 2(x) of the Cr.P.C. as held by this Court in such cases the provisions of Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C. were not applicable and as such stopping of the investigation is without jurisdiction and therefore, the order under revision has to be set aside. Although the "Gadag Co-operative Textile Mills" case, by Kulkarni J. would appear to support the contention of Mr, Jadhav, but the learned single Judge appears to have failed to notice the provisions contained in Clause (c) of Section 12-AA of the Essential Commodities Act, which in terms provides:
"12AA-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code-
(a) & (b) *** *** ***
(c) The Special Court may, subject to the provisions of Clause (d) of this sub-section, exercise, in relation to the person forwarded to it under Clause (b), the same power which a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try a case may exercise under Section 167 of the Code in relation to an accused person in such case who has been forwarded to him under that Section."
5. The Essential Commodities (Special Provision) Act, 1981, has made inroads not only in sentencing powers of the Special Judge in imposing sentence of imprisonment not exceeding two years, but also the procedure to be followed in trial of all such cases under the Essential Commodities Act. As provided under Section 12-AA(f) of the Act, the offences being triable summarily, following the procedure applicable to the trial of summons case, and empowering to sentence not exceeding two years as in summons case, the provisions of Section 167 Cr.P.C. having been made applicable to such cases, the Special Judge, by whatever name he is called, he being the Court of original jurisdiction exercising the power of Magistrate, has the jurisdiction to stop the investigation under Section 167(5) of the Code. It appears to me that the decision in 'Gadag Co-operative Textile Mills', does not lay the correct law on the point. Therefore, it appears, there is no merit in this revision. Revision is accordingly dismissed.