SC – Conviction of 1994 under Essential Commodity Act Quashed – Cement Control Act Inapplicable Post-1989.
The accused – nephew and uncle – were convicted for offence under Section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act
PWD had awarded construction work of a khar passage in cement concrete to Bharat Majdoor Credit Coop Society. Accused NO.3 Madhukar Chairman had sub-let the said work to Accused No.4 Prakash. Accused NO.5 Sadashiv and Accused No.6 were working as peons in the PWD godown.
As per the contract, the PWD was to supply 850 bags of cement from the government quota to the contractor.
However, the second indent of 400 cement bags did not reach the work site. The police found two trucks parked between two shops belonging to the appellants.
In the present case, the alleged offence is stated to have occurred on 24.03.1994. On that date, neither the Cement Control Order, 1967 nor the Maharashtra State licensing regime under the 1973 Order operated so as to attract penal consequences under Section 7 of the E.C. Act. Significantly, the prosecution has failed to place on record any subsisting control order, notification, or statutory restriction in force on the relevant date, violation of which could constitute an offence under Section 3 of the E.C. Act.
This case is illustrative of a prosecution founded on an incorrect appreciation of the statutory framework. The gravamen of the allegation against the appellants was unauthorised purchase, possession and storage of cement allegedly procured through Government or controlled supply channels meant exclusively for public works.
Judgment dated 13.2.2026 of the Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeal No.1630 of 2015 of Manoj Vs. State of Maharashtra and another with connected criminal appeal.
