Allahabad High Court
Ishwar Dev Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 April, 2024
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:70443 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43060 of 2023 Applicant :- Ishwar Dev Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Santosh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record.
3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Ishwar Dev Yadav with the prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding as well as impugned charge-sheet dated 24.04.2023 & cognizance order dated 15.06.2023 in Criminal Case No. 41604 of 2023 (State of U.P. Vs. Ishwar Dev Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 0233 of 2022, under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Karimuddinpur, District Ghazipur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur with a further prayer that proceeding of the aforesaid case be stayed against the applicant during the pendency of the present application.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has raised a sole argument before the Court that the first information report and the proceedings against the applicant are vague in nature in as much as there is no specification and recital in the same as to which control order has been violated. It is submitted by placing the judgement of another Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Farmeeda Begum vs. State of U.P. and another in Application U/S 482 No. 14626 of 2021 decided on 19.04.2022 by placing paragraph 7 of it that co-ordinate Bench has held that there is no reference of any violation of any control order in the first information report but Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act has only been mentioned. The allegations are vague in nature and the proceedings against the applicant deserve to be quashed.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the contrary submits that the first information of the present matter was lodged on 13.10.2022 under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act in which there was a specific recital regarding the applicant indulging in short weighing of food grains being wheat and rice and the first information report specifically states therein that the said act is in violation of the U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale & Distribution Control) Order, 2016 and U.P. Food Security Rules, 2015 and also against the conditions of license granted to the accused and as such is punishable under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955. It is submitted that thus there is a specific recital in the first information report regarding the acts of the accused-applicant being contrary to law which have been specifically spelled out in it and as such it cannot be said to be a vague and a cryptic prosecution. It is submitted that the present petition be thus dismissed.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is facing prosecution for offence under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act. The allegations in the first information report are of a complaint being made regarding short weighing of wheat & rice food grains from the fair price shop of the applicant. The matter was investigated and charge-sheet was submitted on which cognizance has been taken and the applicant has been summoned to face trial. In so far as the argument regarding the vagueness of the first information report is concerned, the same does not in any manner stands on a test of the first information report since the first information report itself states that the act of the accused is contrary to the U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale & Distribution Control) Order, 2016 and U.P. Food Security Rules, 2015 and also the terms of his license which are punishable under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act. Prima facie offence is made out. No interference in the present petition is called for. In so far as the judgement of another Bench is being relied upon is concerned, the same in paragraph 7 of it states that there was only a reference in the first information report that Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act has been imposed. The facts thus stand distinguishable with that of the present case.
8. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.4.2024 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.)