KALIPADA NANDI Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS rule is directed against an order of conviction and sentence, under Section 7 of Act XXIV [24] of 1946, passed by a Magistrate, at Arambagh, and confirmed in appeal by the Sessions Judge, Hooghly.

(2.) THE prosecution case was that on 26th June 1949, 130 mauuds of paddy and 4 maunds and 10 seers of rice were found in a boat moving down stream near the Ghat at Chak Bashia. It is said that the accused Kalipada Nandi was in that boat. Admittedly, he had no license for taking these goods away in the boat. The charge framed against this Kalipada Nandi was that he had contravened the provisions of Section 3(1), Bengal Food Grains Control Order, 1945, by engaging in an undertaking involving storage for sale of this paddy and rice without any license, Section 3(1) of that Order prohibits any dealer or large producer from engaging in any undertaking which involves the purchase, sale or storage for sale in wholesale quantities of any food grain.

(3.) BOTH the Courts below appear to have proceeded on the basis that the accused was a dealer. A dealer is defined in Section 2 (b) of the Older in these words :