STATE Vs. BIKRAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent was charged by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi under section 8 of the Essential Commodities Act for contravening the provisions of Delhi Specified Articles (Regulations and Distribution) Order, 1981. On a plea of guilty he was convicted for the aforesaid offence and sentenced to the payment of tine of Rs 800.00 in default of payment of which he was required to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months.

(2.) The state felt aggrieved of the order in as much as according to the appellant the sentence awarded was disproportionate to the gravity of the offence involved.

(3.) I have heard Mr. R.P. Lao, counsel for the State, and have gone through the record. For a proper assessment of the issue involved I may notice the facts that gave rise to the prosecution of the respondent. The charge against the accused-respondent is that he did not maintain the proper and regular account in respect of the receipt of Palm Seed and Rape Seed Oil received by him for distribution at different times. Admittedly, there was no allegation that the respondent had unautborisedly and improperly diverted the material or had attempted to or sold it to persons who were not entitled to procure it. There was further no allegation of any excess or shortage in stocks.