Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a Senior Executive of M/s. Agricore Commodities Private Limited, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of FIR No. 3021 of 2015 registered at Panvel Taluka Police Station, Raigad, under Sections 3, 7, 8, and 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The FIR was lodged by the first respondent, a Supply Inspection Officer/Rationing Officer, alleging that on 1 July 2013, during a raid at M/s. Akshay Warehouse, the petitioner's company was found storing 3359 gunny bags of toor dal (pulses) in contravention of government notifications and licensing orders under the Essential Commodities Act. The goods were seized, and the crime was registered on 2 July 2013. The Bombay High Court had earlier granted ad-interim relief restraining the filing of a charge-sheet, and the petition was admitted on 1 February 2019 with the interim relief confirmed. Subsequently, the Collector of Raigad issued a notice dated 15 July 2013 under Section 6A(2) of the Essential Commodities Act for confiscation and destruction of the seized commodity. The court noted that the Collector had passed an order under Section 6A(2) for confiscation and destruction of the seized toor dal. The key legal issue was whether criminal prosecution could proceed without a valid sanction under Section 6A(2) after the confiscation order. The petitioner argued that once the Collector passed the order under Section 6A(2), no prosecution could be initiated without sanction. The State opposed the petition, but the court found that no sanction had been obtained. The court held that the order under Section 6A(2) for confiscation and destruction of the seized commodity bars prosecution unless sanction is obtained. Since no such sanction was obtained, the FIR and all proceedings were quashed. The court allowed the petition and directed that the FIR be quashed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Essential Commodities Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 6A(2) Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - The court considered whether criminal prosecution under Sections 3, 7, 8, 10 of the Essential Commodities Act can proceed without a valid sanction under Section 6A(2) after confiscation proceedings have been concluded. The court held that once the Collector passes an order under Section 6A(2) for confiscation and destruction of the seized commodity, no prosecution can be initiated without obtaining prior sanction from the competent authority. The FIR was quashed as the prosecution was not sanctioned. (Paras 4-6) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 Constitution of India - The court examined whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to quash an FIR when the prosecution is without lawful sanction. The court held that where the statutory requirement of sanction is not complied with, the FIR and all proceedings are liable to be quashed to prevent abuse of process. (Paras 1, 6) C) Essential Commodities Act - Confiscation and Prosecution - Section 6A(2) Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - The court analyzed the interplay between confiscation proceedings under Section 6A(2) and criminal prosecution. The court held that the order of the Collector under Section 6A(2) for confiscation and destruction of the seized commodity operates as a bar to prosecution unless sanction is obtained. In the absence of such sanction, the FIR is unsustainable. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 can be sustained in the absence of a valid sanction under Section 6A(2) of the Act, after the Collector has already passed an order of confiscation and destruction of the seized commodity.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. FIR No. 3021 of 2015 registered with Panvel Taluka Police Station, District Raigad under Sections 3, 7, 8 and 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and all proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Sanction under Section 6A(2) of Essential Commodities Act
- 1955 is mandatory before prosecution for offences under Sections 3
- 7
- 8
- 10 of the Act
- Confiscation proceedings under Section 6A(2) bar criminal prosecution without prior sanction
- Writ of mandamus lies to quash FIR when prosecution is without lawful sanction
