Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53044 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24800 of 2024 Applicant :- Zakir Husain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Affidavits have already been exchanged in the instant matter. 3. On precise question arguments has been raised by the learned counsel for the applicant while challenging veracity of entire proceeding which includes charge-sheet alongwith summoning order also in pursuance of Case Crime No. 0548 of 2018 in which mandatory provisions of Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 has not been complied with, it is the specific stand taken up by the learned counsel for the applicant that while taking cognizance of offence punishable under the Act of 1955 on a report in writing regarding the facts for constituting such offence made by a person who is a public servant as defined in section 21 of the Indian Penal Code has been obtained. 4. When the matter was taken up on dated 13.02.2025, coordinate Bench of this Court specifically invited explanation from the District Magistrate, Bijnor, as to why no attention has been paid to the orders passed by the trial Court. Additionally, an explanation, by way of an affidavit, has also been called from both the Investigating Officers, who had conducted the investigation, and the Officer approved the charge-sheet as to why without complying with requirement of Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and following mandate of standing order dated 15.06.1982. 5. In pursuant to order dated 13.02.2025 it is crystal clear that no personal affidavit has been preferred at the behest of District Magistrate, Bijnor but at the same time two affidavits have been preferred by one at the behest of the then Investigating Officer and another one by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Kanpur Nagar who had been Circle Officer, City Bijnor at the time of incident mentioned in the F.I.R in Case Crime No. 0548 of 2018. 6. By bare perusal of both the affidavits, no specific response in pursuance of query made vide order dated 13.02.2025 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court specially in respect of compliance of Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Although approval order dated 27th February, 2025 passed by District Magistrate, Bijnor is appended as Annexure CA-1 available at page 5 in the affidavit preferred by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Kanpur Nagar and at the same page of affidavit preferred at the behest of the then Investigating Officer for adjudicating controversy raised in the instant application it is necessary proved reproduced Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, U.P. Mandate vide U.P. Act No. (9) of 1974 section 7 (w.e.f. 24.04.1974). "11. "11. Cognizance of offences.―No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act except on a report in writing of the facts constituting such offence made by a person who is a public servant as defined in section 21 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of I860) [or any person aggrieved or any recognised consumer association, whether such person is a member of that association or not]. [Explanation.―For the purposes of this section and section 12AA, "recognised consumer association" means a voluntary consumer association registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law for the time being in force.]" STATE AMENDMENT Uttar Pradesh- In section 11, for the words "by a person who is a public servant as defined in section 21 of the Indian Penal Code" substitute the words "by order of, or under authority from the District Magistrate or such other officer an may be empowered by the State Government by general or special order in this behalf." [Vide Uttar Pradesh Act 9 of 1974, sec. 7 (w.e.f. 24.04.1974]." 7. By bare perusal of Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 it is crystal clear that seeking report in writing of fact constituting such offence is a pre-condition for taking cognizance of offence by the learned court concerned but in the instant matter the report in writing which is appended alongwith affidavit issued by the District Magistrate, Bijnor on 27.02.2025 whereas cognizance has been taken up on dated 06.10.2021 and as such it is crystal clear that compliance of Section 11 has not been made at the time of taking cognizance of offence which barred by Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, pre-condition for taking cognizance as well as, as per the government order dated 15th June, 1982 approval/report received by the District Magistrate or Competent Authority designated by him was required at the time of preferring charge-sheet by the concerned Investigating Officer but the same has not been done in the instant matter and as such charge-sheet dated 04.01.2019 and cognizance order dated 06.10.2021 in absence of compliance of mandatory provision available under Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as well as in terms of government order dated 15th June, 1982 the same are hereby quashed and set aside. This order will not preclude the authorities to re-initiated the proceeding, if required in strict compliance of law. 9. The application stands partly allowed. Order Date :- 10.4.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad