'Officer Without Authority Took Action' : Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction For 'Black' Sale Of LPG Cylinder In 1995
The Supreme Court recently set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which had upheld a Trial Court order convicting persons who had involved in the sale of ‘black’ gas cylinders in a 1995 case.A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Rajesh Bindal was hearing the appellants’ plea against their conviction under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. On February 2,...
The Supreme Court recently set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which had upheld a Trial Court order convicting persons who had involved in the sale of ‘black’ gas cylinders in a 1995 case.
A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Rajesh Bindal was hearing the appellants’ plea against their conviction under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
On February 2, 1995, Sub¬Inspector of Police along with other police officials was present at bus stop, Phagwara. They received a secret information that the appellants were indulging in selling gas cylinders in black. They were charging ₹ 250 instead of the prescribed rate of ₹102. On these grounds, an FIR was registered and police officials went at the spot and apprehended the accused. They were taken into custody.
In the evidence led before the trial court, none of the independent witnesses or the alleged buyers of the cylinders in black supported the case of the prosecution except for two official witnesses.
The only charge which could be proved was unauthorized possession of gas cylinders on the basis of which the trial court convicted the appellants and ordered imprisonment.
The order passed by the trial court was upheld in appeal by the High Court.
The only argument the appellants raised was in terms of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1988. Clause 7 of the Order authorises certain persons to stop and search any vessel or vehicle which the officer has reason to believe has been or is being or is about to be used in contravention of the order which doesn’t include a sub-inspector. The clause reads as below:
“ 7. Power of entry, search and seizure:¬ (1) an officer or the Department of Food and Civil Supplies of the Government, not below the rank of an Inspector authorised by such Government and notified by Central Government or any officer not below the rank of a Sales Officer of an Oil Company, or a person authorized by the Central Government or a State Government and notified by the Central Government may, with a view to ensuring compliance with the provisions of this Order, for the purpose of satisfying herself that this order or any order made thereunder has been complied with…”
The counsel for the State submitted that the appellants were found in unauthorized possession of the gas cylinders. So, they have rightly been convicted and merely for some technical default, they should not be allowed to go scot¬-free.
The Court noted that the order nowhere prescribes that a Sub-¬Inspector of the Police can take action.
“No doubt, the aforesaid Clause provides that in addition to the specified officers, the persons authorised by the Central or State Government may take action under the Order. However, nothing has been placed on record to support the argument that the Sub Inspector of the Police was authorised to take action under the aforesaid Order”, the Bench observed.
Adding on, the Court opined that it’s a settled law that “where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods are necessarily forbidden”.
“In the absence of the authority and power with the Sub-Inspector to take action as per the Order, the proceedings initiated by him will be totally unauthorised and have to be struck down”, the Court said before allowing the appeal.
Case Title: Avtar Singh & Anr Versus State Of Punjab | Criminal Appeal No. 1711 Of 2011
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 272
Essential Commodities Act 1955- Section 7 - Person convicted for unauthorized possession of LPG cylinders acquitted- SI who took action was found to be not an authorized officer who could take action under the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order-In the absence of the authority and power with the Sub-Inspector to take action as per the Order, the proceedings initiated by him will be totally unauthorised and have to be struck down-where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods are necessarily forbidden.