IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30576 of 2009 LALAN KUMAR SINGH, son of Sri Devi Dayal Singh, village Chilniawan, PS Amba, District Aurangabad – Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 2 18.5.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order, dated 28.7.2009 passed by the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in G.R. No. 1361/2007 / Tr. No. 108/2008 by which the court has refused to discharge the petitioner under section 239 of the Cr.P.C. The facts are that the petitioner has been called to face trial in a case under section 420 of the Penal Code and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Admittedly the petitioner is a dealer having his shop in village Chiliniawan under Bairawan Gram Panchayat. Certain amount of wheat, rice and sugar were seized from his home. After enquiry charge sheet was submitted. In the mean time a confiscation proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. In the said confiscation proceeding the seized items were released in favour of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was justified in keeping the food grains in his house due to M.C.C. menace. It has been demonstrated by the petitioner that the menace was not an empty threat but was justified in view of attacks by the M.C.C. and as a precautionary measure the petitioner had kept the grains in his house. The court below while considering the discharge 2 petition has accepted the fact that there was no allegation that the petitioner had indulged in black marketing of the good grains. The only allegation is that the petitioner ought not to have kept the grains in his house as it was in contravention of the licence granted to him. This court cannot ignore the fact that there is M.C.C. menace in the district of Aurangabad nor can this court ignore the fact that the explanation given by the petitioner is believable and backed by certain incidents, which goes to show that there was a threat that the food articles could have been looted or that the entire shop could have been blown up by M.C.C. Considering these aspects this court finds that there is insufficient material to come to the conclusion that the petitioner had deliberately contravened the provisions of the licence and kept the food grains in his house specially in absence of the allegation that the petitioner was involved in selling the food grains in black market. The impugned order is accordingly quashed and this application is allowed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)