CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19964 OF 2000 --------- In the matter of an application under section 482 of the Indian Penal Code. --------- BISHWANATH MANDAL son of late Topi Lal Yadav, resident of village-Shankarpur, P.S.-Singheshwar, (Shankarpur). Dist.-Madhepura. ……. …….Petitioner Versus 1.STATE OF BIHAR 2.Jung Bahadur Singh Yadav son of late Tanuk Lal Yadav, Resident of village-Shankarpur, P.S.-Singheshwar (Shankarpur), Dist.-Madhepura. ……. ……..Opp. Parties. For the petitioner: M/s Chandrashekhar, Sr.Advocate Pankaj Kumar Singh For Opp. Party No.2: Mr.Amar Nath Jha For the State : Mr, B.P.Singh, A.P.P. --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ---------- Rakesh Kumar,J. In the present case order of cognizance dated 4.6.2000/5.6.2000 passed by Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Madhepura in Spl. Case No.1 of 2000 arising out of Singheshwar P.S. Case No.161 of 1999 is under challenge. 2. It is not in dispute that cognizance order was passed by Special Judge, E.C.Act, Madhepura after Essential Commodities (Special Provision) Act,1981 had come to an end. The operation of provision of Essential Commodities (Special Provision) Act, 1981 was finally ceased with effect from 8.7.1998 and in the present case order of cognizance was obviously passed on 4.6.2000/5.6.2000 i.e. after the end of the operation of Essential Commodities (Special Provision) Act, 1981. 3. Accordingly, this petition is hereby disposed of 2 Patna High Court, The 21st July, 2010 Md.S./NAFR in terms of the order dated 7.7.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 716 of 2000 and other analogus cases in which following order was passed: “Accordingly, all the aforesaid orders of cognizance under challenge are hereby set aside on the ground of absence of jurisdiction. However, in terms of order dated 3.5.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No.15851 of 1999 and other analogus cases, the matter is remitted back to the concerned area Magistrate having jurisdiction to try Essential Commodities Act cases as per law. However, it is made clear that the petitioners would be at liberty to raise all other points, if required, at an appropriate stage. The aforesaid petitions are allowed to the aforesaid extent and the matter is remitted back to the appropriate court i.e. court of C.J.M./S.D.J.M. at the concerned place for expeditious action.” (Rakesh Kumar,J.)