MUTHUKRISHNAN ALIAS ANBAZHAGAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIMADVERTING upon the order dated 28.06.2006 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Pondicherry in C.A.No.54 of 2004 confirming the conviction and modifying the sentence passed in C.C.No.179 of 2001 dated 09.07.2004 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pondicherry, this criminal revision is focussed.

(2.) A 'resume' of facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision petition would run thus:

(3.) THE learned counsel for the revision petitioner inviting the attention of this Court to various portions of the judgment would develop his argument to the effect that P.Ws.4,5, 6 and 8, the ration card holders deposed in support of the accused to the effect that they purchased kerosene during the relevant months concerned, however, because of the rush prevailing at the ration shop, entries were not made by the accused in their respective cards. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the revision petitioner is not a dealer and only a dealer is punishable under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 r/w clause 4(a) of the Pondicherry Essential Commodities (DSPMA) Order 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the 'order'). Here admittedly the accused is only a salesman and in such a case, conviction recorded as against him and consequently the sentence imposed is untenable.