IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9421 of 2008 RAM KRIPAL SAH, SON OF LATE RAMFAL SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-PANCHTAKI YADU, P.S. BAIRGANIA, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. --PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --OPP.PARTY _____ For the Petitioner : Mr. Lovekush Kumar For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhya 2 05.05.2010 Heard both sides. This is an application seeking quashing of the order dated 29th January, 2008 taking cognizance for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act in Bargania P.S. Case no. 93 of 2006. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the instant case, in fact, no offence has been committed rather there was simple irregularity of non-displaying of stock of fertilizers and prevailing rates on the day and violation of Display Order and non-maintenance of stock register, cash memo. etc. is at best an offence under Section 3(2)(h)(i) of the Essential Commodities Act punishable under Section 7(1)(a)(i) for the period of one year. There is no dispute that 2 the above offences was committed on 10.7.2006 and cognizance was taken on 29.1.2008 whereas the period prescribed under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to take cognizance for such petty offences is one year only. Learned additional Public Prosecutor fairly conceded that the impugned order is hit by period of limitation as prescribed under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On this ground alone, this application stands allowed and the proceeding before the court below is hereby quashed. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.) AAhmad