IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41318 of 2007 RAM DAHIN PASWAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ----------- 6 26-08-2008 Heard Mr. Anjani Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya, the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner who is a dealer under the Public Distribution System faces prosecution in Chandi ( Tharthari ) P.S.Case No.200 of 2007, registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act ( hereinafter referred to as “ the E.C.Act” ) and has prayed for the quashing of the First Information Report thereof . It appears that one Suryadeo Prasad Chaudhary, Supply Inspector , Tharthari lodged the written report on 21.6.2007 inter alia alleging that on 23.5.2007 at about 1-00 P.M. Manoranjan Kumar, Executive Magistrate, Hilsa-cum- Senior Incharge Officer, Tharthari Block inspected the shop premises of the petitioner and in course thereof several consumers including Arun Kumar complained regarding supply of Kerosene Oil at intervals of 2-3 months at a rate higher than the rate fixed and the stock register was not being displayed. It is alleged that about 104 litres of Kerosene Oil was short and that stock register of food-grains under Antyoday Scheme had not been made available. It is also alleged that a show cause was issued to the petitioner by the District Magistrate, Nalanda which has not been responded to by the petitioner. - 2 - It is by now well settled by a catena of decisions that a dealer under the Public Distribution System is exempted from prosecution in view of Clause 31 (2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order,1984 which gives full protection to the dealer from prosecution as they happen to be the agents of the Government. It is also well settled by the decisions of the Apex Court and this Court that a prosecution under Section 7 of the E.C. Act is only maintainable when there is contravention of some Order made under Section 3 of the E.C. Act. No such contravention of the Order whereof has been alleged in the written report. In view of the discussions made above, the prosecution of the petitioner appears to be an abuse of the process of the court. Accordingly, the F.I.R. as also the prosecution so far the petitioner is concerned is hereby quashed and the application is allowed. ( Abhijit Sinha, J) NKS/-