PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. D BHADRAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are four appeals against acquittal of the four accused for contravention of the Essential Articles (Price Control) Order, 1963, made under R. 125 of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, for not prominently displaying on a special board, a list of essential articles held by him for time to time in stock for ready delivery and the past and present prices of the articles at which he proposes to sell them, in terms of Para. 4 of that order. The accused in each case pleaded that he had not so displayed it, but stated that he was not aware of the rule and, therefore, he did not exhibit the price lists. The Magistrate acquitted them on two grounds, namely, that under R. 141 of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, it is essential that individual notices of the promulgation of the order must be served and

(2.) that since there is no date mentioned for the commencement of the order, the order had not come into effect. (2) In my view, both these grounds are untenable. On the first ground, it is necessary to read R. 119 of the Defence of India Rules, 1939, in juxtaposition with R. 141 of the Defence of India Rules, 1962. Defence of India Rules, 1939:-

(3.) On the second question, that since, there is no date, the notification does not come into existence, I may at once say that when an order is published in a gazette, if that order is silent as to the date on which it comes into operation, the date of publication of the order itself is the date on which it comes into operation. I may refer to a Full Bench decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Ramjilal v. Piparia Municipality, A I R 1959 Madh Pra 82 at p. 84 in which Hidayatullah C. J., (as he then was) observed thus :