LAWS(CAL)-2022-11-22

SHYAMDAS MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Decided On November 09, 2022
Shyamdas Mondal Appellant
V/S
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is against the judgment and order dtd. 18/8/1990, passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Essential Commodities Act, Barasat, convicting the accused under Sec. 7(1) (a) (ii) of Act, 1955 for violation of para 3(7) of the West Bengal High Speed Diesel Oil (Licensing, Control and Maintenance of Supplies) Order, 1980 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00 in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month in Special Court Case No. 153 of 1988.

(2.) The prosecution case is that S.I. Dinabandhu Das, D.E.O., Bongaon lodged a written complaint with the O/C of Gaighata P.S. on 15/5/1988 to the effect that on that day he along with W/C Haripada Sharma, W/C Mihir Chakraborty, W/C Dinabandhu Chakraborty and others under the supervision of Inspector S. Chatterjee checked the kerosene oil retail dealer's shop of accused Shyamdas Mondal of village Angrail and found one Bimal Kr. Chakraborty, employee of the shop present. On checking the stock register of kerosene oil and after physical verification of stock of kerosene oil they found no defect. But during checking of the kerosene oil shop of the said kerosene oil dealer they found 175 litres of H.S.D. (High Speed Diesel) oil kept in a drum and exposed for sale. Being interrogated the employee of the shop failed to produce any licence or permit for carrying on H.S.D. oil business. The owner of the shop did not turn up. The accused shop owner violated the provision of para 3(7) of W.B. H.S.D. Oil (Licensing Control and Maintenance of Supplies) Order, 1980. So they seized the said quantity of 175 litres of H.S.D. Oil along with measuring pots under a proper seizure list in presence of the witnesses.

(3.) Gaighata P.S. 12/88 was started and the case was endorsed to S.I. D.B. Das for investigation (Dinabandhu Das, the complainant), who submitted chargesheet. The appellant/accused pleaded "not guilty" and on completion of trial the appellant was convicted and sentenced as above.