1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1467 OF 2002 Ganesh Govindrao Pame, Age 52 years, occupation business, r/o Kacchi Bazar, Parbhani. ...PETITIONER VERSUS State of Maharashtra. ...RESPONDENT ... Mr. S.S.Bora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mrs. B.R.Khekale, A.G.P.,for respondent State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:6/8/2009 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. 2. Based on discreet information dt. 26.7.2002, a truck MH-23-1204 was searched by Police authorities in which 120 quintals of wheat was found. It was destined for Hyderabad. The truck driver and another person Ganesh Ambhore, informed that it was lifted from a godown, in the 2 M.I.D.C., of Ganesh Pame. The godown was searched. It was felt that the wheat was transported, to be sold in unauthorized ways and it was a controlled commodity. 3. The prosecution is launched against the accused/applicant herein for the offence under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, without disclosing as to under what Rules he has been prosecuted and what is the violation thereof. 4. This Court, by order dt.9th Jan.,2003, having gone through the record and hearing the Counsel, directed the learned A.P.P. to file copy of the order issued under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, with specific reference to the clause of the subject order which is breached by the act of petitioner/accused, who has allegedly transported 110 gunny bags of wheat. Statement of V.S.Narwade, Naib Tehsildar, was sought to be relied. However, it was based only on information, without any cogent and coherent document to indicate that the goods were inhibited item or there was prohibition for movement of wheat at the relevant time. 5. The contention of the accused/appellant is more less supported by the statement made by the District Supply Officer, Parbhani, in which he has stated that, at the relevant time, there was no 3 inhibition for storing, stacking the wheat as it was not a controlled item though, according to him, in the godown some empty gunny bags of Food Corporation of India were found. However, that too, by itself, will not be a parameter to indicate that it was controlled item, which applicant desired to transport or deal with. 6. The accused did not deny or dispute that the goods belonged to him. Accused contended that he had valid license issued by the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Parbhani, in the name of Girish Trading Company. Such permission/license is tendered at Exh.A. 7. Taking survey of above facts, I find that the prosecution of the accused/applicant for Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, without disclosing any violation of provisions or any orders passed under Section 3 of the Act is itself not maintainable. The First Information Report or the report display that no offence is committed by the petitioner/accused, in relation to the wheat which was seized by the Police authorities in the truck. . Consequently, Criminal Application (No. 1467/2002) is allowed. The First information report vide Crime No.3037/2002 of New Mondha Police Station, Parbhani, for the offense under Sections 3 4 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, is quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute accordingly. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... agp/1467-02crapl