IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUIDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No. 9788 of 2008 ASHOK KUMAR BHAGAT, S/O SARYU PRASAD BHAGAT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SIMRAHI, P.S. RAGHOPUR, DISTRICT SUPAUL .. PETITIONER VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR .. OPPOSITE PARTY **** /2/ 14.05.2010 Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is for quashing the order, dated 20.03.2007, passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Birpur, in Raghopur P.S. Case No. 102 of 2004 by which he has taken cognizance under Sections 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and 406/34 of the Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case, as alleged in the written report of Raghopur Police that it recovered 27 drums of the kerosene oil from an enclosure by tatti of Ram Prasadi Sah, who has taken the land on rent from Ashok Kumar Bhagat. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the first information report itself it has come that it is Ram Prasadi Sah who is engaged in the business of kerosene oil and this petitioner has nothing to do with the same. It has further been contended that the petitioner is not a licensee of a Public 2 Distribution System dealer and, hence, can not be prosecuted and for which he has placed reliance on decisions reported in 2007 (Supl.) P.L.J.R., 285 (Ajay Chaudhary Vrs. The State of Bihar) and 2007(2) P.L.J.R., 289 (Mahanthi Yadav & Anr. Vrs. The State of Bihar). In the facts and circumstances there being regard to the fact that the allegation in the first information report that Ram Prasadi Sah had kept kerosene oil in the land enclosed with tatti which he has taken on rent from Ashok Kumar Bhagat and Ashok Kumar Bhagat is not a licensee of under Public Distribution System, hence, order taking cognizance against the is hereby set aside. 5. With these observations and directions, this application is allowed. S.A. ( Gopal Prasad, J. )