IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.49705 of 2008 AWADH KISHORE PRASAD SINGH, Son of Sri Harihar Singh, resident of Village- Goitha Dih, P.S. Sadar(Nawada), District-Nawada. ......Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR...........................................Opposite Party. ----------- 4. 29.01.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.11.2008 by which the court below has taken cognizance against him under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. An F.I.R. was instituted in which it is said that the shops of several dealers had been raided on 12.04.2005 and the Investigating Team found various shortcomings in the shops of the dealers mentioned in the F.I.R. So far the petitioner is concerned, it is said that (A) the petitioner has closed his shop without giving any notice; (B) the villagers had complained that they only distributed Oil on the occasion of a festival; (C) the people under the scheme of B.P.L. had not received their quota as per the orders of the Government; (D) the Price Display Board was not found in the shop and (E) the villagers are hesitant to complain about the petitioner because of his criminal character. On the basis of the First Information Report and shortcomings found by the Investigating Team, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and his license was cancelled. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Hon’ble 2 Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7211 of 2005 challenged the order of cancellation and this Hon’ble Court remanded the matter back to the Licensing Authority. Eventually, after obtaining the permission of the District Magistrate, the license of the petitioner was restored vide Memo No. 357 dated 30.11.2005. Obviously, it seems that the Licensing Authority did not find that the petitioner had contravened the terms of license and thus restored the license of the petitioner which basically leads to the conclusion that in fact the petitioner was found not guilty on the departmental side for having committed any offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. On perusal of the First Information Report, it would be appear that the date on which raid was made, admittedly, the petitioner’s shop was closed, and as such, prima facie it would be appear that the Investigating Authority would not get the opportunity in fact to inspect the Stocks available in the Shop, Sale Registers etc. Without examining these aspects of the matter it can not be said that the petitioner was prima facie guilty of any of the acts as mentioned in the First Information Report. Thus, this Court, therefore, can not hold that the petitioner is guilty of the illegalities which have been pointed out on behalf of the Investigating Team as in fact no inspection had taken place on the date on which raid was made. Considering the fact that the petitioner’s license has been restored and in view of the observations made aforesaid, I find that 3 no offence is made out under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, the order of cognizance dated 12.11.2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah in Roh P.S. Case No. 29 of 2005 is, therefore, quashed. This application is, accordingly, allowed. U.K. (Sheema Ali Khan,J)