PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. KAMAKSHI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State represented by the learned Public Prosecutor has preferred the above six appeals challenging the order of acquittal passed in S.T.C. Nos, 544, 545, 546, 741, 773 and 774 of 1979 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruchirappalli, acquitting all the accused in the above cases of the charge for contravention of sub-clause (2) of clause 20 of Cotton Textile (Control) Order, 1948 as per Textile Commissioners Notification No. C.E.R. |10|1977. dated 15th April, 1977, punishable under section 7 (1) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as amended in 1974.

(2.) Now, I shall give the brief facts of these cases, which are similar, leading to the prosecution. The, Textile Inspector (P.W. 1) inspected the respective power loom factories of the accused in each of these cases on various dates noted in the respective complaints and found that the accused had produced dhoties with borders exceeding 6.35 mm. in width containing coloured yarn in the dhoti border. P.W. 1 seized the material objects marked in each of the cases and recorded statements from the concerned accused persons. Show cause notices were issued for contravention of the notification of the Textile Commissioner. As the explanations given by the accused were not satisfactory and convincing, the complaints were preferred against the accused in each of the cases. All the accused denied the offence.

(3.) All these cases have ended in acquittal for the following common reasons: (1) As the prosecution has been launched after one year from the date of the inspection, the prosecution is time barred. (2) The notification has not been filed before the Court. (3) On the side of the prosecution, no judicial pronouncement of the High Court of Tamil Nadu has been brought to the notice of the trial Court to the effect that the Court can take judicial notice of the existence of the notification .