Mere Possession Of Large Quantity Of Kerosene By Consumer Not An Offence Under Essential Commodities Act: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that mere possession of kerosene without a permit does not constitute an offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (which prescribes penalties for contravention of orders issued under the Act).

The Court remarked that the Kerosene (Restriction of Use and Fixation of Prices) Order, 1993, only applies to licensed dealers and distributors operating under the Public Distribution System (PDS), not individuals found in mere possession of kerosene.

The Court relied on the Supreme Court's Ipour GKC & RKC & Sons V. State. 2008, which held “that the restriction imposed by Pondicherry Kersone Control Order was on the sale and not on the purchase, and the purchaser cannot be held liable.”

Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked that: “The learned Courts below did not consider whether the kerosene order applied to a consumer or not. Thus, the judgments passed by the learned Courts below suffer from jurisdictional error.”

Background:

The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar approached the High Court challenging his conviction under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, after 170 litres of kerosene was recovered from his car in Hamirpur.

He contended that he was falsely implicated as the investigation was conducted by an unauthorised officer who was not empowered under the Kerosene (Restriction of Use and Fixation of Prices) Order, 1993.

The Court remarked that the Kerosene (Restriction of Use and Fixation of Prices) Order, 1993 only applies to dealers and suppliers, not to consumers. Since the petitioner was merely found in possession of kerosene and was not engaged in business, the order did not apply.

However, the Court observed that the investigation was void as it was done by the Sub-Inspector who was not authorized under Clause 9 of the Kerosene Order, only the specific officers such as Inspectors and Food and Supplies officials were authorized.

Case Name: Rakesh Kumar v/s State of H.P.

Case No.: Cr.Revision No.387 of 2014

Date of Decision: 06.11.2025

For the Petitioner: Mr.Adarsh Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr.Tarun Pathak, Deputy Advocate General

Click Here To Read/Download Order