S SREENIVASA SETTY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been convicted by the Metropolitan Magistrate, (IV Court), Bangalore, under S.7(l) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.750 and in default to simple imprisonment for sixty days. His appeal has been dismissed by the Third Addl Sessions Judge, Bangalore, with the sentence of fine reduced to Rs.500. The validity of the conviction and sentence is called into question in this revision petition.

(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are these: On 17-5-1973, the house of the petitioner was searched and a little over six bags of sugar were seized. The petitioner had no licence under the Karnataka Sugar Dealers' Licensing Order (shortly called 'the Licensing Order').

(3.) The petitioner did not adduce any evidence to show that he acquired the said quantity of sugar or any other purpose other than the business of purchase or sale. All that was urged for him before the Courts below and also before me is that mere possession of sugar by itself was not sufficient to raise the presumption that he has been carrying on the business of purchase or sale of sugar; but, the prosecution should lead independent evidence in proof of the same. Both the Courts have rejected that contention and their conclusion is based on Clause 3 (3) of the Licensing Order.