IN RE: JAMBULINGAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner sacks to question the propriety of his conviction for an offence under S. 3(1) of the Madras Paddy and Rice (Movement Control) Order, 1968, read with S. 7(1) of the Essential Commodities Act. The offence was caught to be proved by the testimony of P.W. 1 who was working as a Sub -Inspector of Police.

(2.) ON 8th March 1969, at about 9 -30 p.m. P.W.1, Inspector Dhakshinamurthi and some others, constituting his party, went to Kammankadu forest area, about one hundred yards away from Thanjavur -Ramanatbapuram border. P.W.1 claimed that the petty was watching for illicit movement of paddy and rice from Thanjavur District to Ramanathapuram District. They noticed the accused petitioner driving a double bullock cart with load proceeding towards Nalu road village in Ramanathapuram District. The cart was proceeding along the Arantangi -Puduvayal road. It was about one hundred yards away from the other district border. The party found six and a half bags of boiled rice. The petitioner -accused was driving the cart. He did not have any permit to transport those bags to Ramanathapuram District. He was arrested. The cart and the rice bags were seized.

(3.) THE learned trial Magistrate has drawn adverse inference from two consistent pleas made by the accused -petitioner. But the main plea of the petitioner -accused was that he was taking the rice belonging to one Udayappa Thevar from Arantangi patharasankotial and that when he was three miles away from Arantangi he was arrested by the Police. The petitioner stated that he comes from the village of Kammankada, Inasmuch as he belongs to the said village of Kammankadu, the movements round about that village would certainly not arouse any suspicion; much less furnish any evidence as to his transporting any rice bags without a permit. It should be consistent with his plea that he was only transporting the rice from Arantangi to Patharasankottai.