JANARDHANAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Case is filed by the accused who has been convicted under S. 287 of the Ma dras City Municipal Corporation Act, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200/ - in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two weeks.

(2.) THE case against the revision petitioner accused is that for the year 1987 -88, without obtaining a licence from the Corporation, the accused was running a bakery and therefore he is liable to be convicted and punished under the said section. The accused denied the offence.

(3.) I find no justification for interfering with the said order of the lower Court. It is not in dispute that during the relevant period i.e., 1987 -88 the accused was running a bakery. It is also not in dispute that no licence has been issued in that respect. The case of the accused appears to be that he has sent the licence fee on 11.2.1987 itself but he has not received any order either granting the licence or rejecting it, and therefore, it cannot be said that he has committed any offence. According to the Corporation a rejection order was passed on 31.7.1987 and that has been communicated to the accused.