IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.350 of 2007 MD.SHAMIM KHAN @ SHAMIM Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 6 20.8.2008 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is a wholesale as well as retail sale dealer of edible oil etc. He is the proprietor of M/S Khan Traders, P.S. Haveli Kharagpur, District- Munger. In the instant writ application the petitioner prays for quashing the F.I.R. and entire prosecution of Kharagpur P.S. Case No.188/05 dated 25.12.2005 instituted for an offence under section 7 of the E.C.Act on the basis of written statement of the Supply Inspector. 3. The prosecution case in short is that the informant on getting confidential information raided the business premises of M/S. Khan Traders on 15.9.2005 at 11.45 A.M. and found huge quantity of Nepali Dalda in the shop of the petitioner for illegal sale. On enquiry the informant further found that the petitioner has stored several tins of Nepali Dalda at different places. As such a case under section 7 of the E.C. Act was instituted against the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the firm of the petitioner was duly registered under section 14 of the Bihar Finance Act,1981 for dealing in wholesale and retailsale of vanaspati etc. A copy of such certificate is appended as Annexure -2 to this application. Learned counsel submits that items in question are duly purchased items through 2 various challans and bills. He submits that seizurelist would show that the aforesaid articles were purchased through challans and bills. He purchased 667 Jars of Vanaspati from Aadarsh Traders ,Main Road Raxaul, East Champaran, through Invoice No.84 on payment of the cost a sum of Rs.3,45,673.25 including Vat Tax @ 4% and Agriculture Tax @ 1% as contained in Annexure-4 to the writ application. He further submits that the aforesaid goods were supplied to the petitioner through Subh Luxmi Transport, Raxaul vide Permit No.83. He submits that out of 667 tin jars only 353 Jars of vanaspati made in Nepal were sold to the customers on valid cash memo after realizing the VAT charge. In this respect the return has already been filed before the Commercial Tax Department. 5. Learned counsel submits that since the Central Government by Notification No.GSR-104(E), dated 15.2.2002 has removed licensing requirement , stock limit and movement restriction on Specified Food Stuff by Clause 3 of the aforesaid notification now there is no need for taking licence for which earlier there was such restriction. 6. Section 3 of the notification reads as follows:- “3:- With the coming into effect of this order, any Distribute, dispose, acquire, use or consume any Quantity of what, paddy/ rice, coarse grains, sugar, edible oils and shall not require a permit or license therefore under any order issued under the Essential Commodities Act,1955.” 7. It is submitted that subsequent to the issuance of the Notification dated 15.2.2002 by the Central Government the State 3 Government has also issued notification in consonance with the Notification and has deleted edible oil, food grains etc. from the provisions of Bihar Trade Articles (Licence Unification) Order, 1984. In view of the aforesaid notification there is no regulation of either of the Central Government or the State for purchase, possession, storage or sale of edible oil, including hydrogenated vegetable oil. Since the edible oil has been deregulated from Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the petitioner’s Firm is not required to have any licence for purchase and sale. In absence of any term or regulations under the provisions of E.C.Act it cannot be said that the petitioner has violated the provision of Section 7 E.C.Act. As such the Supply Inspector has no authority of search and seizure under the Act. 8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties this Court finds that the alleged act of the petitioner as complained in the F.I.R. does not constitute any offence in the case either under section 7 of the E.C.Act or under other sections aforementioned. As such the petitioner has rightly relied upon a decision of this Court, dated 25.11.2005, passed in Ram Binod Sah vs. The State of Bihar and anr vide Cr.W.J.C. No.386/2005. 9. Under the given circumstances, continuance of criminal proceeding would amount an abuse of process and as such the criminal proceeding in connection with Kharagpur P.S.Case 4 No.188/05 is quashed and this writ application is allowed. AnilK.sinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)