THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJU CRIMINAL PETITION No.5058 of 2009 BETWEEEN: 1.Devarakonda Appar Rao, S/o.Sri Nagaraju & another … Petitioners/A-1 & A-2 AND State of A.P, rep. by Public Prosecutor … Respondent/complainant HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.5058 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners 1 and 2/A1 and A2 are accused of offence punishable under Section 7(1)/3(2)(C)(D) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in short, the Act) in CC.No.69 of 2009 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Yellamanchili, Visakhapatnam District. A1 and A2 are driver and cleaner of tanker lorry No.AP 31 T 8989. It is alleged that P.D.S (Public Distribution System) Kerosene was being transported in the lorry without any permit and other papers. The lorry was intercepted on 17.12.2006 at about 18:30hrs and the lorry along with the contents therein were seized. Now A1 and A2 are sought to be prosecuted under Section 7(1) of the Act. 2. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that the lower Court took the charge sheet on file for offences punishable under Section 7(1) r/w.Section 3(2)(C) & (D) of the Act without application of mind and that Section 3(2)(C)(D) is not a penal provision and is only a provision enabling the Government to pass control orders. The lower Court did not take the case on file independently under Section 3(2)(C)(D) of the Act, but, took cognisance of the case for the offence punishable under Section 7(1) r/w. Section 3(2)(C) & (D) of the Act. It means that the petitionrs rendered themselves punishable under Section 7(1) of the Act for contravention of the control orders passed by the Government in exercise of powers under Section 3(2)(C)&(D) of the Act. Thereore, there is nothing incorrect if the Magistrate took the case on file for offence punishable under Section 7(1) r/w.3(2)(C) &(D) of the Act. 3. At the same time, it is noticed by this Court that though the offence took place on 17.12.2006, the charge shet in this case was signed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nakkapalli Police Station on 29.12.2008 and it was filed in the lower Court on 27.01.2009 and it was taken on file by the Magistrate on 07.02.2009. The offence under Section 7(1) of the Act is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and also liable to fine. Therefore, a required under Section 468 2(b) Cr.P.C., the charge sheet in this case should have been filed and the Magistrate should have taken cognisance of the same within one ear of detection of the offence or the commission of the offence. But as pointed out earlier, the charge sheet is filed in the lower Court beyond two years of commission of the offence; and therefore is clearly barred by limitation. There is no plea on the part of the police officer who filed the charge sheet for extension of time for any grounds pleaded. Thus, the charge sheet in this case is hopelessly barred by limitation. 4. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing proceedings in CC.No.69 of 2009 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Yellamanchili, Visakhapatnam District. _____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J Dated: 24.02.2011 ysk THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.5058 of 2009 DATED: 24.02.2011 ysk