Nirmal Kumar Garodia v. The State of Assam and 2 Ors

ORDER Date : 17-12-2024

¶1Heard Mr. G.N Sahewalla, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. H.K. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B Sarma, learned Addl. PP, Assam.

¶2The present application is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of BI(EO) PS Case No.17/2015 under sections 120(B)/420/406/426 IPC.

¶3The fundamental allegation as discernible from the FIR is to the effect that on the basis of a tip off, the BI(EO) had conducted an enquiry in the business premises of the petitioner and another wholesaler at Radha Rani market on getting a report of speculative malpractice of trade articles in organized manner by not following the provisions of prevailing control orders as well as for violating terms and conditions of trade licenses granted for the business and from such report, the BI(EO) had reason to believe that the dealers are involved with abnormal price hike of pulses in the market.

¶4It is also alleged that in the stock register the quality, make, as well as source of receipt were not disclosed. However, it was found that excess food grains/materials were received by the accused dealers. Page No.# 3/4

¶5The fundamental allegation is that in terms of the verification of sale records, it was found that higher prices were charged. Finally on the basis of the materials collected by the BI(EO), it was alleged that the accused dealers were maintaining incorrect books of accounts and are involved with speculative malpractice violating the provisions of Assam Trade Article (Licensing & Control) Order, 1982 (hereinafter referred to Order, 1982). According to the BI(EO), as stated in the FIR, it is believed that the accused deserved to be punished for criminal breach of trust and mischief etc, apart from provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

¶6From the aforesaid, it is seen that the fundamental allegation is violation of the Order, 1982. When the allegation is of violation of the Order 1982, which mandates disclosure of price and stocks and also mandates to sell goods on the price already fixed under the control order, any allegation of violation of the same will be an offence under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

¶7The aforesaid Order, 1982 was put to challenge in Premier Roller Flour Mill Vs. State of Assam And Ors reported in (2013) 1 GLR 927. After elaborately dealing with the issue, this court declared that the Order, 1982 is ultra vires of the Removal of (licensing, requirement, stock limits and movement restrictions) on Specified Food Stuffs Order, 2002.

¶8In view of the aforesaid the allegation made in the FIR to the effect that the accused petitioners has violated the provisions of Order 1982, shall not be sustainable as on date. Page No.# 4/4

¶9If that being the position, the other allegation of commission of offence under the Indian Penal Code are being relatable and arises out of the offences under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act shall also not been sustainable.

¶10In view of the aforesaid, the present petition stands allowed by setting aside and quashing the FIR dated 05.06.2015 in BI(EO) PS Case No.17/2015, Srimantapur, Guwahati, under sections 120(B)/420/406/426 IPC.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010209382015 2024:GAU-AS:12807 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./503/2015 NIRMAL KUMAR GARODIA S/O LT. SITARAM GARODIA PROPRIETOR OF M/S NEW STAR CORPORATION R/O TRP ROAD FANCY BAZAR GUWAHATI DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS 2:BIPIN C. CHAKRAVARTY INSPECTOR FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES and CONSUMER AFFAIRS BIEO SRIMANTAPUR GUWAHATI-32 ASSAM. 3:JUGANANDA CHANGMAI INSPECTOR FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES and CONSUMER AFFAIRS BIEO SRIMANTAPUR GUWAHATI-32 ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR.P DEKA Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY