Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Thatikonda Venkateswarlu vs Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Cell, ... on 23 August, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(5)ALD543, 2000(1)ALT204
Author: Bilal Nazki
Bench: Bilal Nazki
ORDER
1. All these petitions raise same questions of fact and law, therefore they are decided by this common order. All the petitions are filed on behalf of the persons who are accused in cases registered under the Essential Commodities Act. In some cases bail applications have been rejected by the Sessions Judges and in some of the cases the Magistrates have dismissed the bail petitions. Writ petitions have been filed solely on the ground that the enforcing agency as well as the Courts below are treating the offences under Amending Act 18 of 1981 which has since lapsed, therefore, the offences are needed to be tried under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 without having recourse to Amending Act 18 of 1981.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Additional Advocate General for respondents.
3. The Essential Commodities Act was amended by an Amending Act being Act 18 of 1981 with from effect 1st September, 1982 and offences under the Act were made non-bailable and triable by a Special Judge. This amendment had to remain in force for a period of fifteen years. The period ended somewhere in 1997. Since the Act had lapsed, the Government of India issued an Ordinance on 3-10-1997 keeping the amended Act operative. This was not ratified by the Parliament and lapsed after six months in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. Similar Ordinance was again promulgated on 25-4-1998. This also could not be converted into an Act by Parliament and by afflux of time it has also lapsed.
4. There is no dispute with regard to this factual position between the parties. So, as a matter of fact, as on today Amending Act 18 of 1981 is neither in existence nor operative. The normal corollery would be that, for registering and trial of offences the State shall have to bank upon the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as it stood before the amendment of 1981. The original Act makes it clear that offences under the Act are bailable and triable by a Magistrate. Since the offences are bailable and they are triable by a Magistrate, the learned Additional Advocate-General appearing for the respondents submits that the writ petitions are not maintainable because if a person accused of under the Act is arrested he has a remedy of seeking bail from the Magistrate. That may be true, but it appears from various orders produced in these petitions that, even some Magistrates are under misconception that the offences under the Act are non-bailable, even the Sessions Judges are under the misconception that the offences under the Essential Commodities Act are to be tried in accordance with Amending Act 18 of 1981.
5. Without going into the question whether the writ petitions are maintainable or not, I would like to direct the Judicial Magistrates and also the enforcing agency of the State Government to treat the offences under the Essential Commodities Act in accordance with the provisions of 1955 Act and not in accordance with the Amending Act 18 of 1981. These directions shall remain operative till the laws remain as they are today.
6. Let the Registry issue a circular to all Magistrates and Sessions Judges informing them that offences as on today under the Essential Commodities Act are bailable and if an application is made before them under Section 436 CrPC that should be disposed of accordingly.
7. With these observations all these writ petitions are disposed of. The accused who have already been ordered to be released on bail need not seek fresh bail. No costs.