BALARAMAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BALARAMAN is the accused-petitioner who questions ihe propriety and the legality of the order passed by the District Magistrate (J.), Chineleput convicting nun of tlw offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. read with Section 2 of the same Act. for contravening clous 3. Sub-clauses (1) and (2 ). of the Madras Paddy and Rice Dealers (Licensing and Regulation) Order. 1968. The accusation against him was that on 27-2-196s at about 20-00 hours, at G. N. T. Road, Red Hills, opposite to the Bus Stand, the petitioner and seven others (already acquitted) were found transporting 55 bags of Sirumani Paddy in a lorrv MDS. 5378 from Nellore side to Red Hills which is in Saidapet Taluk and which is a notified area, without a valid permit.

(2.) P. W. 1 is the Heed Clerk in the Civil Supplies Section of the Collectorate at Kanehipuram, who proved the sanction order from the Collecto-rate. P-W. 1 further stated that the Inspector of Police, Food Cell, C. I. D. (P. W. 2) sent a report to the Collector, stating that Balaraman and seven others had possessed paddy in excess of two quintals and that they were transporting 55 bags of paddy in a lorry M. D. S. 5378. P. W. 2 is the Inspector, who speaks to the seizure I the paddy iron: the lorry M. D. S. 5378 coming from Nellore side at a good speed. loaded with gunny bags, which were seized after the lorry crossed Padianallur check-post and went inside Red Hills, a notified area. The petitioner (accused-1) Was found to be the driver of the lorry. P. W. 2 speaks to the fact of submitting area report to the Collector of the Chingleput District at Kanchipuram, requesting sanction, on 26-4-1969.

(3.) WE have already noticed that P. W. 1 has proved the contents of Ex. P-l which is the sanction order.