YUSUFF Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision by the accused in C.C. No. 45 of 1983 on the file of the Special Judge (Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge) Bangalore is directed against his conviction and sentence passed by the Special Judge for contravention of Condition 3 of the licence granted to one Siddique under the provisions of the Karnataka Foodgrains (Retail Dealers) Licensing Order, 1964 as per the Judgment and Order dated 24th December, 1983.

(2.) Certain Siddique who was the proprietor of Burma Stores, situate at No. 123, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Road, Frazer Town, Bangalore holds a licence under the Karnataka Foodgrains (Retail Dealers) Licensing Order, 1964 (for short the Order). The order was passed by the Government of Karnataka under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short the Act). The accused was a Salesman-cum Clerk-under Siddique in his Burma Stores. On 21-3-1983 when Mritunjaya Shastry (P.W.1) Sub-Inspector of Food Cell, visited the Burma Stores run by Siddique, the accused was found not maintaining correct accounts in respect of rice, wheat and wheat products and the accused, thus contravened the provisions of the Order and also Condition 3 of the licence granted to Siddique. Hence he rendered himself liable for punishment under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

(3.) The Trial Court after conducting a trial and appreciating the evidence adduced in the case came to the conclusion that the accused had violated condition 3 of the licence issued of Siddique and thereby contravend the provisions of the Order, rendering himself liable for punishment under Section 7 of the Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of the fine, to suffer further imprisonment for 15 days, giving the benefit of the provisions contained in Section 428 Cr. PC., if available to him. The accused being aggrieved by this conviction and sentence passed against him, has filed this revision challenging the correctness and legality of the same.