KODAKARA PANCHAYAT Vs. SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant, the Executive Officer, Kodakara Panchayat, is the appellant in all these appeals. They are directed against the order of acquittal passed by the trial Magistrate under S.255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In all these appeals the first respondent, the accused in the case, is the same individual. He was prosecuted on account of his failure in taking licence under S.96 of the Kerala Panchayats Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) The accused is a person running a tile factory within the jurisdiction of the Kodakara Panchayat. The Panchayat initiated action under S.96 of the Act and fixed licence fee for the tile factories in the area. The 1st respondent was directed to take licence in accordance with the bye laws published by the Panchayat. On his failure to take the licence, prosecution was launched against him for the periods from the financial year 1978-79.

(3.) The accused, on entering appearance before the Judicial I Class Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakuda, inter alia, contended that the Panchayat had not taken all the legal steps required for publishing the bye laws prescribing the licence fee, that there was no previous approval of the Director of Panchayats to notify the area as one for the use of which licence is required under S.96 of the Act, that there was no quid pro quo for realising this licence fee and that the prosecution initiated is not maintainable in view of the non compliance with the provisions contained in S.74 of the Act. The learned Magistrate found that there is no quid pro quo for realising the licence fee. Basing on this finding, the accused was acquitted in all the cases.