MOHD. WASEEM AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Applicants were convicted by the Additional City Magistrate, Kanpur, of an offence Under Section 35 of the UP Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1962 and were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 75/ - each. In default of payment of fine they were directed to undergo simple imprisonment for seven days. They went up in revision before the Civil and Sessions Judge, Kanpur, who affirmed their conviction and sentence. Hence, this revision.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution the Applicants were found by the Labour Inspector to have kept their shop open and conducting business on 28 -8 -1966 which was a weekly closed day under the UP Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1962. A bogus purchaser was sent to the Applicant's shop and the Applicants bargained the price of a Hammer Master Thermos with the said purchaser. On these facts the Labour Inspector sent a complaint against the Applicant to the City Magistrate, Kanpur. The complaint gave rise to the present prosecution of the Applicants.

(3.) IT was then contended that the Magistrate First Class who tried the case had no jurisdiction to do so. Reliance was placed on Section 29 Code of Criminal Procedure and it was submitted that where no court was mentioned in a particular statute under which a prosecution had to be launched, the case could be tried only by the High Court or by any court constituted under the Code and indicated in the 8th Column of Schedule II. Section 29 of the Code reads as follows: