STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KIRIT MAGANBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This appeal by the State of Gujarat is directed against the impugned judgment and order, dated 19-1-1985, rendered in Criminal Case No. 8 of 1985, by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad, wherein the respondent-Kiritbhai Maganbhai Patel, who came to be tried for the alleged offence punishable under Secs. 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for the contravention of Clause 25 of the Gujarat Petroleum Products (Licence, Control and Stock Declaration) Regulations was at the end of trial ordered to be acquitted on the short ground that despite several opportunities given to the prosecution, it failed to keep witnesses present and examine them before the Court.

(2.) . To state few relevant facts of the prosecution case, as are succinctly reflected in Charge (Exh. 4), on 9-4-1980 at 13-00 hours, the complainant on tip-off raided the shop running in the name and style of 'M. S. Patel Kerosene Depot', situated at Chokdi of Village Alindra of the ownership of one Kiritbhai Maganbhai Patel and seized therefrom 3000 liters of diesel oil valued at Rs. 4,860.00 for which the owner had no licence and 2069 liters of kerosene valued at Rs. 3,020-74 without the same being accounted in the Stock Register maintained for the purpose. On the basis of these facts, after the complaint came to be filed against the respondent for the aforesaid alleged offences and after the investigation was over, the respondent was chargesheeted to stand trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad.

(3.) . From the Rojkam proceedings, it appears that the charge-sheet against the respondent was filed on 21-10-1980 and that on the basis of the same, after the case came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 852 of 1980, summons were issued to the respondent making it returnable on 23-10-1980. On 23-10-1980, the respondent appeared before the Court and thereafter for one reason or the other, the matter went on being adjourned from time to time upto 20-8-1981 and then to 24-9-1981. It also further appears that during this period the respondent remained absent on several occasions and therefore, Iearned Magistrate was constrained to issue non-bailable warrant against him. Quite surprisingly enough, it further appears that there is yet one another separate Rojkam proceedings appearing on the record of this very case, which is subsequently numbered as Criminal Case No. 8 of 1984, starting from 20-3-1984 .There also we find that the matter went on being adjourned from time to time on several occasions. Here also, on 18-6-1984, as the respondent remained absent, non-bailable warrant was issued against him, making it returnable on 25-6-1984. On that day, the respondent remained present, and therefore, Charge (Exh. 4) was framed against him. On his plea being recorded, he pleaded not guilty to the charge, and thereafter, the case was adjourned to 2-7-1984 for recording evidence of the prosecuting witnesses. On 2-7-1984, as Shri Ravishankar Maharaj had expired, the case was once again further adjourned to 7-7-1984 for recording the evidence. Thereafter, the case went on being adjourned for about 23 times for recording the evidence and ultimately on 19-1-1985, as stated above, the respondent came to be acquitted on the ground of prosecution failing to examine its witnesses despite several opportunities given to it.