VIPUL NANDLAL RAMANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who was original accused no. 1 in Summary Case No. 5/1994 in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Bhavnagar, has challenged his conviction u/S. 3 read with sec. 7 and 12 AA of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Vide judgment dated 1st October, 1994 he has been convicted and sentenced to suffer RI for two years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000.00, in default RI for six months for the aforesaid offences.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 22nd March, 1993 at about 2.30 p.m. complainant of this case Mr. S.H. Kathi alongwith his staff was on patrolling in the areas of Bhavnagar city. At about 3.30 p.m. he came near temple of Lord Hanuman and he noticed that about 45 cylinders of cooking gas were concealed in the cluster of shrubs of babul. He, therefore, went there and found that the present appellant was in possession of those concealed cylinders. He was, therefore, arrested under the provisions of section 41 (1) (d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and the cylinders were attached under the provisions of section 102 of the Code. A panchnama was drawn and necessary entry was got made in the register of "A" Division Police Station by giving information to the Police Station Officer. He thereafter entrusted the cylinders to the Police of "A" Division Police Station and also handed over the appellant to them. The police thereafter intimated the Collector about the recovery of the gas cylinders and arrest of the appellant. Hence, the Collector called for the relevant papers by his letter dated 26th March, 1993. All the relevant papers were made available to the Collector and thereafter the Collector passed orders dated 19th August, 1993 and 16th October, 1993 for lodging complaint against the appellant. During investigation of the case it was revealed that alongwith appellant original accused nos. 2 and 3 were having partnership and the gas cylinders were supplied by original accused no. 4 to them. In view thereof, all the four persons were charge-sheeted in the Court of the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhavnagar, who forwarded the case to the Court of Ld. Special Judge since the offence is exclusively triable by that Court by virtue of section 12AA of the Act. Before the Ld. Special Judge the case was numbered as Special Case No. 5 of 1994.

(3.) At the end of the trial the Ld. trial Judge came to the conclusion that offence against the accused was proved. He, however, acquitted original accused nos. 2 to 4 on the ground that the requisite permission to prosecute them from the Collector was not given. So far the appellant is concerned, the Ld. trial Judge convicted him for the aforesaid offences and awarded sentence as stated above. In these circumstances, the present appeal is filed before this Court.