BABOOLAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts leading to this Criminal Revision application are as follows: The applicant-accused Babulal s/o Mannalal of Mandsaur was put up for trial in the Court of Additional District Magistrate, Mandsaur, for charge under Section 3 (a) of Foodgrains Control of S. Y. 2005 and Section 8 of Essential Supplies Temporary Powers Act and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 150/- and in default rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Sessions Judge, Mandsaur, but it was dismissed. The accused Babulal s/o Mannalal is the manager of the shop of Ramratan Pannalal at Mandsaur. It is alleged that in July 1950, this firm while dealing as adatia and commission agent dealt in grains to the extent of 470 maunds of maize (Makka ). It was supplied by them to different merchants at Ratlam and Ramratan Pannalal as adatia earned a commission of Rs. 104-7-6. The case of the prosecution is that the firm Ramratan Pannalal had not obtained license to deal in grain as a wholesale dealer. Therefore the District Magistrate Mandsaur convicted the accused under Section 3 (a), Madhya Bharat Foodgrains Control Order of S. Y. 2005 (1948 ).

(2.) THE aforesaid section states that no person shall deal in Foodgrains as a wholesale dealer except under and in accordance with a license issued by an officer authorised by Director of Food Madhya Bharat.

(3.) THE main contention of Mr. Samvatsar, learned pleader for the petitioner is that in July 1950, the Foodgrain Control Order of S. Y. 2005, was not in force in Mandsaur and therefore the petitioner had not contravened the aforesaid order and, therefore, the conviction under the Foodgrains Control Order is illegal and must be set aside.