KASHI PRASAD Vs. REX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Kashi Prasad Nigam was convicted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate of Lucknow for two offences under the U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act (in [3] of 1947) and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25 or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one mouth under each count. the case has been referred to this Court by the learned Sessions Judge of Lucknow with the recommendation that the applicant's convictions were illegal and might be quashed.

(2.) The material facts are as follows: Kashi Prasad Nigam is the owner of a house in Lucknow. He let it out to T. P. Nigam. T. P. Nigam informed the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Lucknow, who exercised the powers of the District Magistrate under Act III [3] of 1947, that he would vacate the house on 30th April 1947. He actually vacated the house on 4th May 1947. Having received this information, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer passed an order on 6th May 1917, asking Kashi Prasad Nigam to furnish certain particulars with regard to this house. This notice was served upon Kashi Prasad on 23rd May 1947. Kashi Prasad furnished the required particulars and intimated that he had already let out the house to Har Bishun Dayal. On 26th May 1947, the Rent Control Officer issued an order requiring Kashi Prasad to let out the house to one Shyam Behari Lai. When Shyam Behari Lai went to occupy the house he was told by Kashi Prasad that the house had already been let out to Har Bishun Dayal. The order of the Rent Control Officer dated 26th May 1947, was acknowledged by Kashi Prasad on 31st May 1947. He informed the Rent Control Officer that be had let out the house to Har Bishun Dayal. His version was that he bad sent a postcard on 6th May 1947the day after T. P. Nigam vacated the houseinforming the District Magistrate that the house had fallen vacant. But as no direction was received by him from the District Magistrate, he had let out the house to Har Bishun Dayal.

(3.) Under Act III [3] of 1947, the District Magistrate may by an order require a landlord to give intimation of the falling vacant of any accommodation of which he is the landlord and to let out such accommodation to any person nominated by him. Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of any such order is liable to be punished with simple imprisonment or with floe or with both. The postcard which Kashi Prasad Nigam is alleged to have Bent to the District Magistrate intimating that his house had fallen vacant could not be traced. It does not appear to have been received by the District Magistrate. A charge sheet was in these circum. stances prepared by the Bent Control Officer against Kashi Prasad Nigam for having failed to inform the District Magistrate that his house had fallen vacant and for having let it out without his permission in contravention of Section 7 of the Act, the District Magistrate sanctioned Kashi Prasad's prosecution under Rs. 7 and 9 of the Act, Kashi Prasad was thereupon tried on two counts: 1. That he had failed to inform the Rent Control and Eviction Officer that his house-had fallen vacant and so committed a breach of Clause 1, Rent Control and Eviction Order of 1945 and thereby rendered himself punishable under a. 7 of the Act, and (2) that between 1st and 22ad May 1947, he let out his house without the District Magistrate's permission and thereby committed a breach of Clause 3, Lucknow Rent Control Order of 1945,' and rendered himself punishable under Section 7 of the Order read with Section 9 of the Act. The only witness examined for the prosecution was an inspector of the office of the Rent Control Officer who gave formal evidence in proof of the order issued by the Rent Control Officer. The trying Magistrate 'disbelieved Kashi Prasad that he bad sent a postcard and held that be had failed to inform the District Magistrate that the house had fallen vacant. He further held that he let out the be use without the District Magistrate's permission.