Legal Provisions Involved: Section 3 and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955; Maharashtra Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973; Cement Control Order, 1967
Judgement by: Supreme Court of India
Judge/Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan
Facts
The Appellants were convicted for offences under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. It was alleged that on 24.03.1994, Government quota cement meant for a PWD construction project was diverted and found stored in premises connected with the Appellants. The High Court affirmed the conviction, leading to the present appeal.
Key Legal Provisions
Section 3 and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955; Maharashtra Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973; Cement Control Order, 1967
Issues raised
- Whether the Cement Control Order, 1967 and Maharashtra State licensing regime remained operative on the date of the alleged offence.
- Whether a conviction under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 can be sustained in the absence of a subsisting statutory order under Section
Arguments of the case
The Appellants argued that no operative order existed on the date of the incident while the Respondents argued that the appellants possessed Government cement without valid licence, thereby contravening statutory provisions. It was further argued that the burden was upon the Appellants to explain lawful possession.
Judgement
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the conviction. The Court held that since statutory control over cement had been rescinded prior to the alleged offence, no subsisting order existed, making the prosecution legally untenable.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
