EKNATH KALUBA MOKASHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE involves a substantial question of law as to whether the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant for offence punishable under sections 3 read with 7 of the Essential Commodities Act is sustainable in law.

(2.) THE graveman of the charge levelled against the appellant and one Sukhadeo (Original accused No. 1) was that the appellant was found selling kerosene at highter rate than permitted by the Government and thereby commited offence under section 3 read with section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for contravening Clause 3 of Maharashtra Kerosene (Dealers Licensing) Order, 1966 (for short, hereinafter, referred to as the Order of 1966) as well as Kerosene (Fixation of Ceiling Prices) Order, 1970 (For short, the order of 1970 ). The original accused No. 1-Sukhadeo was charged for having purchased 20 litres of kerosene oil at higher rate than fixed under the aforesaid Orders of 1966 and 1970.

(3.) ON behalf of the prosecution, four witnesses were examined which includes members of police party and panchas. It may be stated that panchas, however, did not support the prosecution on the point that any of the accused was found selling or purchasing kerosene oil.