RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused/appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.8.1990 passed by the Special Judge under the Essential Commodities Act in Special Case No. 1/1989 convicting accused/appellant Rajendra Singh for the offence punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act (for short the 'Act') and accused Ram Milan for the offence punishable under Section 8 of the Act, and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay fine of Rs. 2000 in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution in briefisthaton30.6.1988 S.N. Singh who was posted as Sub-Inspector at Rajhara, received an information that one person was selling the rice meant for Relief Work in the open market and acting upon that information he went to the shop of accused/appellant Ram Milan Gupta where one truck bearing registration No. MPS 5653 was standing. In the said truck 8 bags of rice was kept and 32 bags were unloaded in the shop of Ram Milan Gupta. Thereafter, 32 bags of rice was seized by him vide seizure memo Ex. P-2 from the shop of accused/appellant Ram Milan Gupta and truck bearing registration No. MPS 5653 along with 8 bags of rice were seized from accused/appellant Rajendra Singh vide Ex. P-3. First Information Report Ek. P-4 was registered. On 25.4 1989 notices Ex. P-5 and Ex. P-6 were given to the accused/appellants asking them to produce the licence, if any, of sale and purchase of foodgrains but they failed to produce the same.

(3.) IN order to prove the guilt of the accused/appellants the prosecution has examined three witnesses. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the material appearing against them in the prosecution case and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case. Accused Rajendra Singh has taken a specific defence that he has three trucks and prior to the incident they were engaged in the relief work. In each truck 40-50 labourers were working and in lieu of wages rice was being given to them. On the date of incident 40 bags of rice weighing 38 quintals was given to the drivers of the trucks for being distributed amongst the labourers and as the space was not available in his house to keep the said rice, for one day it was being unloaded in the chaff shop of accused/appellant Ram Milan with his prior permission. At that time, police came and seized the rice. He has not committed any offence. Accused/appellant Ram Milan took the defence that as accused/appellant Rajendra Singh was not having sufficient space for storing the rice, he requested him to let him use his shop for one day to keep the rice. i While the rice was being unloaded in his shop, police came there and seized the rice, and he has not committed any offence. Accused/appellants have examined two witnesses namely, Chandrahas Chandrakar (DW-1) and Ganesh (DW-2) in their defence. Chandrahas Chandrakar (DW-1) has stated in his evidence that he has handed over 1500 kgs. of rice to the driver of the truck No.MPS 5633 lamely Ganesh for being distributed amongst the laboures working in the said truck in lieu of wages. He has also stated that he handed over 800 kgs. of rice to the driver of truck No.MPR 6894 namely Santosh for being distributed amongst the labourers working in the said truck. His statement has been supported by Ganesh(DW-2).