SINGH AND CO Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B. L. Yadav, J. The applicant has filed the present criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Code), against the judgment and order dated 23-7-83 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Varanasi, dismissing the appeal preferred by the applicant under Section 6-C of the Essential Commodities Act, (for short the Act), (as amended by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 1966), arising out of the order dated 22-5-81 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Varanasi.

(2.) IT appears that a licence was obtained by the petitioner for steam coal under Clause 4 of the U. P. Coal Control Order, 1977. A notice was given to the petitioner under Section 6-A of the Act on the report of the Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supplies) to the effect that on this spot neither the stock board nor 'rate-board' was available, nor any other document was made available, and the applicant did not return after assurance that he would furnish the requisite papers. Consequently, this inference was possible that he did not prepare any relevant document, and hence the proceedings for confiscation as contemplated under Section 6-A of the Act be initiated and the coal of the petitioner may be confiscated. A reply to the show cause notice was furnished by the petitioner as required under Section 6-B of the Act, but the same was not found satisfactory. Consequently, the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Varanasi, by order dated 22-5-81 directed the confiscation of 132 mt. of coal and auction of the same. The said quantity of coal appears to have been put to a auction sale. Against that order the applicant preferred an appeal under Section 6-C of the Act, which failed, hence the present Revision under Sections 397401 of the Code was filed.

(3.) BEFORE the points urged are discussed, it would not be inappropriate if some elementary rules of construction of penal statutes are referred. Depriving a citizen from his privilege of licence or imposing punishment for violation of conditions of licence or violation of provisions of the Coal Control Order, 1972, impose criminal penalties. The rules imposing criminal penalties should be narrowly construed in favour of the person proceeded against. In London and Country Commercial Properties Investments Ltd. v. Attorney General, (1953) 1 WLR 312, at page 319, it was held : The principle applied in construing a penal Act is that it in construing the relevant provisions, there appears any reasonable doubt or ambi guity, it will be resolved in favour of the person would be liable to the penalty.