9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether a court taking cognizance of an offence u/s 11 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, upon a police report, is precluded from looking into the complaint or first information report. 2. Whether the police report submitted u/s 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, satisfies the requirements of Section 11 of the Essential Commodities Act for taking cognizance of an offence. Summary: Issue 1: Cognizance of Offence and Scope of Review by the Court The primary issue was whether a court taking cognizance of an offence u/s 11 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, upon a police report, is precluded from looking into the complaint or first information report filed before the court. The appellants argued that the police report did not disclose any offence and the court was not competent to look into any other paper while taking cognizance of the offence u/s 190 of the Code read with Section 11 of the Act. The Division Bench of the Patna High Court held that Section 11 was fully complied with when the Executive Magistrate submitted his report to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who then directed the police to investigate. Issue 2: Compliance with Section 11 of the Essential Commodities Act Section 11 of the Act stipulates that no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under the Act except on a report in writing of the facts constituting such offence made by a public servant. The court examined whether a police report submitted u/s 173(2) of the Code, disclosing an offence under the Act, satisfies the requirements of Section 11. It was determined that the police officer, being a public servant, and his report in writing, as required by Section 173(2), would satisfy Section 11. The court referenced the case of Pravin Chandra Mody v. State of Andhra Pradesh, which held that a police report by a public servant suffices for compliance with Section 11. Additional Considerations: The court also addressed the argument that the court could only look at the police report and not any other documents to fill in any lacuna. It was concluded that the report u/s 173(2) must contain specific details, and the court can consider the report along with its accompaniments for taking cognizance of the offence. The court found that the charge-sheet in this case contained sufficient information for the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence and proceed with the trial. Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed, affirming that the police report submitted u/s 173(2) of the Code, along with its accompaniments, provided sufficient basis for the magistrate to take cognizance of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
|
