IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1631 of 2009 Udit Yadav, son of Marachhan Yadav, R/O -Village Baghora, P.S.- Kasma, Distt,-Aurangabad. …….Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Bihar 2. Raj Kumar Ram, S/O Jagdish Ram R/O Village-Chandrari, P.S.-Kasma, Distt.-Aurangabad. ….Opposite Parties ---------------------------------- 3. 29.11.2011 The complainant petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 24.07.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in Complaint Case No.586/2007, Trial No.109/2008 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act by which the complaint petition has been dismissed under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant was the Mukhiya of Bathara Gram Panchayat, Rafiganj, Aurangabad on 16.11.2005. Raj Kumar Ram, opposite party no.2 was the dealer of the Public Distribution System and he has also the responsibility to distribute the kerosene oil through the Public Distribution System. The petitioner got complaint by the villagers that the dealer did not supply the kerosene oil, rather, sold it through black-marketing. On 2 16.11.2005 at about 4.00 P.M., the complainant got information that the kerosene oil carried by the accused on trailer while going to sell through black-marketing has been seized by the villagers and the kerosene oil carrying in 8 drums were produced in the police station. Kasma P.S. Case No.35/2005 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act has been instituted. After investigation, final form has been submitted as the case was found not true. The complaint-cum-protest petition was filed to the aforesaid effect in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, which was transferred to the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate for inquiry and disposal. After the inquiry, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate has not found material for summoning the accused and the complaint petition has been dismissed under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even in spite of the sufficient material for summoning the accused, the complaint petition has been dismissed vide the impugned order. The learned counsel for the State submits that the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate has considered 3 the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner during inquiry and has found that there is no material against the accused to summon him. As such, no interference by this Court is required. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the material on the record, it appears that the Kasma P.S. Case No.35/2005 was instituted on the written information given by the petitioner under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. After investigation, no case was found true and the final form was submitted holding the case not true. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the protest petition, which has been treated as Complaint Case No.586/2009. After examining the complainant on S.A. and after examining five witnesses on behalf of the complainant, the learned Magistrate has found that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused and as such, he has been pleased to dismiss the complaint petition. Considering the facts and circumstance stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)