S MARIMUTHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in S.T.C. No. 45 of 1985 on the file of the learned Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act), Madurai is the appellant. He was charged for offences punishable u/ Ss. 3(1)(2) and 5(1) of the Tamil Nadu Essential Commodities (Display of Stocks and Prices and Maintenance of Accounts) Order 1977 read with S. 7(i)(a)(i) of the Essential Commodities Act.

(2.) P.W. 4, Marudayya was the Inspector of Police, Crimes, Civil Supplies, Madurai South on 17-7-1985 he inspected the shops and found the accused running business under the name and style of 'Raja Biscuits Company' at door No. 115, Netaji Road, Madurai. He was having a licence R.C. No. 400208 and he was selling bread. P.W. 4 found that there was no board showing the stock and also showing the price list of the commodities. P.W. 4 prepared a mahazar, Ex. P1 and he got attestation by P.W. 1. Then he served a copy of Ex. P1 on the accused and went to the police station and registered a case in Cr. No. 1780/85 u/ S. 3(1)(2) read with S. 5(1) of the said Act. Ex. P4 is the first information report. Then he examined P.Ws. 2 and 3 and then sought for sanction from the Collector of the District under Ex. P2. Then, after getting the sanction from the Collector under Ex. P2 on 22-8-1985 he filed the charge-sheet against the accused on 30-8- 1985. P.W. 1 is the mahazar witness, who has attested the mahazar under Ex. P1. He turned hostile while he was examined in Court. P.W. 2, Narayanaswami is doing business in grocery at door No. 103. His evidence is that he saw P.W. 1 attesting the mahazar, Ex. P1. He too also attested the same. It was suggested to this witness that P.W. 1 was not there at the time when Ex. P1 was prepared by the police. P.W. 3 Sabanayagam, is the Assistant in the Office of the Collector of Madurai. His evidence is that District Collector granted sanction for prosecution under Ex. P2. Ex.P3 is the requisition given by the Inspector of police. In cross-examination P.W. 3 has stated that he received Ex. P3 on 2-8-1985 from the Inspector of Police requesting for sanction and that the statements of witnesses were not sent along with the report. P.W. 4 is the Inspector of Police. His evidence in Chief examination is that he has sent the requisition Ex. P3 along with the reports of witnesses, mahazar and the first information report to the Collector. His evidence is that he received the sanction under Ex. P2 and filed the charge-sheet on 30-8- 1985.

(3.) The accused, when questioned under S. 313, Cr. P.C., with reference to the incriminating circumstances available from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, pleaded not guilty and denied the charges. The accused has also filed a written statement in this case.