KALIMUTHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants were tried in S. T. C. No. 51 of 1984 on the file of the Special District and Sessions Judge (Essential Commodities Act cases), Madurai for violation of Clauses 4 (1) and 5 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Paddy and Rice (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1974 punishable under Secs. 3 and 7 of the essential Commodities Act, 1955. THE appellants were found guilty as charged by the trial Court and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each and to pay a fine of Rs. 200 each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. However, the third accused (A3) was acquitted by the trial Court. Though Arunasalam, the third appellant had been acquitted by the trial Court, obviously by misapprehension the appeal has been filed on his behalf as well and I also find that bail had been ordered in his favour at the time of admission of the appeal. This is apparently a mistake. This has to be set right recording that there could be no appeal by Arunasalam, the third accused to this Court, since he had been already acquitted by the trial Judge.

(2.) THE facts which led to this prosecution can now be narrated P. W. 5, Inspector of Police, Civil Supplies, C. I. D. and his party at 3.00 A. M. , on 1. 10. 1983 found the lorry bearing Registration No. TNV 6633 proceeding towards Coimbatore from Madurai loaded with 37 bags of rice without valid documents. THE lorry was intercepted at Kodai Road near ammaya Naickanoor and in the presence of P. W. 3 Chellayya 37 bags of rice were seized. However, P. W. 3 has not supported the prosecution and has been treated as hostile. P. W. 5 obtained sanction to prosecute the accused, which order of sanction is dated 9. 5. 1984 and has been marked as ex. P1. Ex. P1 is proved by P. W. 1 an Assistant in the Madurai Collectorate. Of the accused, the third accused (A3) who has been acquitted, is the owner of the lorry. THE first appellant was the driver and the second appellant was the cleaner of the lorry. THE prosecution case was that the acquitted accused loaded the rice bags into the lorry without proper documents.

(3.) IN the result, the appeal is allowed and the appellants are acquitted and the fine, if any paid by them shall be refunded.