STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ARJAN DHARAMSHI KASUNDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this appeal, the appellant State has challenged the judgment and order of the learned Special Judge, Jamnagar dated 15.10.1998 rendered in Special Criminal Case No.1 of 1995, whereby the learned Trial Judge acquitted the original accused opponent herein of the charges for the alleged offences.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that the respondent -accused is the owner of a petrol pump in the name and style "M/s.Gaytri Petrolium" situated on Jamnagar -Kandla Highway No.6 at Village Amaran, Taluka Jodiya, District Jamnagar. It is further case of the prosecution that the respondent -accused has obtained the necessary licence bearing No.R -86 from the Mamlatdar, Jodiya for running the aforesaid petrolpump. The complainant -Supply Inspector, who has been empowered to search and seize, had visited the aforesaid petrolpump of the respondent -accused and took the sample of petrol and diesel in presence of panchas on 18.08.1994 for the purpose of analysis as per the prescribed standards. It is further case of the prosecution that the complainant took three samples of petrol and three samples of diesel in the bottles and sealed the said bottles in the presence of the panchas and signatures of panchas and that of Chandullal Mavjibhai Kasundra -Administrator of the pump were taken on the lables affixed on the bottles, and after drawing panchnama and following the due procedure prescribed under law, the said sample were sent to the Laboratory of I.O.C. Ltd. situated at Gandhidham -Kutch. It is further case of the prosecution that the Deputy General Manager of the said Laboratory vide letter dated 30.08.1994 sent the report of the analysis and according to the said report, the density of the samples was 0.7113. According to the register maintained by the petrolpump, the morning density was noted as 0.7065. It is further case of the prosecution that thus by comparing the density noted in the register and the density according to the report, there was difference of 0.0048. Thus, as the sample was not according to the standard specification, the respondent -accused committed breach of provisions of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and therefore, the complainant lodged a complaint with the police.

(3.) AFTER completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was filed before the learned Magistrate Court. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned Magistrate Court under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") committed the said case to the Court of Special Criminal Case No.1 of 1995, which was, thereafter, numbered as Special Criminal Case No.1 of 1995. Since the opponent -accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried, he was tried for the alleged offences.