AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Janarthanam, J.—This is an application filed u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 197 of 1985 on the file of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sattur.
The Respondent filed a report u/s 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Petitioner-company (accused 1) and its representative (accused 2) for refractions and violations of Clauses 5, 6 and 7 of Paraffin Wax (Supply, Distribution and Price Fixation) Order, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Order'') punishable u/s 7 read with Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act), on the ground that on inspection of the god own of accused 2, he was found in possession of 102 bags of slate wax without a valid permit.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would contend with all vehemence and force that the materials available on record, could, by no stretch of imagination, disclose that what was seized in the case was not paraffin wax as defined under Cl.2(d) of the Order. He would amplify his argument that unless and until it is proved that what was seized was paraffin wax, the prosecution against the Petitioner before the Court below is liable to be quashed.
Cl.2(d) of the Order is an inclusive definition. According to the definition, it includes indigenous or imported paraffin wax and match wax. What was seized in the case, as disclosed from the materials available on record, is only slate wax. Slate wax is not at all included in the definition of ''paraffin wax''. Of course true it is that the Chemical Examiner''s report discloses that the sample of what was seized was found to possess the characteristic of a paraffin wax. The mere fact that the sample discloses the characteristic of a paraffin wax is not by itself sufficient to show that what was seized was paraffin wax. The wax may assume too many forms, slate wax, match wax, and paraffin wax. Depending upon the purity, the wax is classified. It is common knowledge that paraffin wax, is nothing but purified wax which alone is included in the definition under Cl.2(d) of the Order. Cl.5, 6 and 7 of the Order deal only with paraffin wax and not any other kind of wax. Since in this case what was seized was not paraffin wax, but only a slate wax, it cannot at all be stated that any of the Clauses of the Order had been violated, and consequently the Petitioner is not punishable u/s 7 read with Section 3 of the Act. As such, the petition deserves to be allowed.
In the result, the petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C. No. 197 of 1985 on the file of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sattur are quashed.