STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. C T MALSHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the State is directed against the order dated 30-1.1-1977 passed by the First Addl. Sessions Judge at Dharwad in Criminal Appeal No. 40 of 1977 setting aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad in ease No. E. C. 5/77.

(2.) Few facts of the ease are: One Parappa Malshetty the respondent herein is a licensed cement dealer in Dharwad. The Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad received information that the licensed dealers of cement were charging higher rates for the cement then the controlled price and that the respondent was one among them. He therefore ordered the Tahsildar, Dharwad to conduct a raid on the shop of the respondent. The Tahsildar accordingly on 27-4-1977 held a trap on the shop of the respondent. The Tahsildar signed three ten rupee notes and sent one Channabasappa P. W. 1 to purchase one bag of cement from the respondent. Accordingly P. W. 1 went to the shop and purchased one bag of cement. The respondent charged Rs. 23.50 paise for the said one bag of cement and paid back the balance of Rs. 6.50 paise to P. W. 1. To evidence the said transaction he also issued a voucher for Rs. 20.44 paise as per Ex. P. 1. It is the case of the prosecution that immediately thereafter the Tahsildar who is examined as P. W. 2 in the case appeared in the shop and raided the shop of the respondent and seized the aforesaid three ten rupee notes given by P. W. 1 to the respondent and also the amount of Rs. 6.50 paise and the voucher. After completing the formalities with regard to the seizure he reported the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad alleging that the respondent had sold one bag of cement at Rs. 23.50 paise which is admittedly in excess of. the controlled price and further reported that he found 22 bags of cement as against 17 bags noted in the stock register and prayed that action may be taken against the respondent for not maintaining the correct accounts and also for selling the cement at higher rate then the stipulated price.

(3.) After receipt of the report, the Deputy Commissioner issued a show-cause notice to the respondent. In pursuance of the said notice the respondent appeared and filed his objections contending inter alia that he had sold one bag of cement to P. W. 1 at the controlled prevailing rate and that he had not charged any excess amount much less Rs. 3.06 paise as alleged by the prosecution. He also stated that to evidence the said transaction he had issued the voucher Ex. P. 1. With regard to the excess quantity of 5 bags of cement found in his shop, he contended that the said five bags had been sold to one P.N. Bosla who had not lifted the consignment and as such he averred that he had not committed any offence.