LAWS(GJH)-1990-11-21

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SHYAMSUNDER BASALAL

Decided On November 16, 1990
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Shyamsunder Basalal Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal for enhancement of the sentence arises out of the judgment and order dated 19-6-1984, rendered in Criminal Case No. 950 of 1984, by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhavnagar, wherein Shri Shyamsundar Basalal and 8 others who came to be tried for the alleged offences under Secs. 4 and 5 of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 (for short "the Act") were ordered to be convicted for the same and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300.00 and in default R.I. for 30 days.

(2.) Briefly speaking, the prosecution case as reflected and summed up in charge Exh. 4 was to the effect that "Shyamsundar Basalal and 8 others of Bhavnagar prior to 12-8-1984 stated a firm in the name and style of "Shivam Corporation" and gave inducing advertisement inviting funds from the public without licence and thereby committed offence under Secs. 4 and 5 of the Act. During the course of the proceedings, the accused pleaded guilty to the charge and prayed for mercy submitting that they did not know that the licence was required for their alleged activities. After coming to know about the same, they had returned the money to the respective subscribers. The learned Magistrate accepting said plea of guilt, convicted and sentenced each of the accused as stated above in para 1 of this judgment. Hence this appeal for enhancement of sentence by the State.

(3.) Mr. H. B. Antani, learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the appellant-State submitted that the impugned order of sentence till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 300.00 was ridiculously low and contrary to the minimum prescribed under the Act. The learned Addl. P. P. further submitted that taking into consideration the gravity of the offences, namely where innocent gullible lot of the society was cleverly duped and fleeced by such chit schemes, the impugned order of sentence was on the face of it grossly inadequate. Further according to the learned Addl. P. P. in proviso to Secs. 4 and 5 of the said Act, the minimum sentence prescribed, reads as under :