KIRODIMAL AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , who died during the pendency of this revision, was convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter called the 'Act') for contravention of Clause 3 of the Orissa Declaration of Stocks and Prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Order') and was sentenced to undergo S.I. for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default to S.I. for two months more by the Sub -divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panposh. In appeal before the Sessions Judge, Sundargarh the conviction was maintained, but the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to three months S.I. along with a fine of Rs. 500/ - in default to S.I. for two months more.

(2.) THIS case raises the question whether a criminal conviction can be revised after the death of the convicted person. Section 394, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 reads as follows:

(3.) IN this Court Mr. Biswal for the Petitioner relying on two decisions of this Court reported in Basanta Kumar Pal v. State of Orissa, 53 (1980) C.L.T. 29 (Notes 47), Ramanath Das v. State of Orissa, 1981 C.L.R. 80 submitted that at the time when the shop was opening the check was made by the civil supplies staff and the accused had no time to make necessary entries in the Board. But the accused has taken the plea that there was a small Board in addition to a bigger Board where the stock positions of the articles of the essential commodities were mentioned. But this plea appears to be an afterthought and the accused -Petitioner has also not led any evidence in support of this plea. The learned Courts below after careful consideration of the evidence on record found the Petitioner guilty under Section 7 of the Act. After considering the argument of both sides, the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances of the case, I also see no reason to differ from the concurrent findings of both the Courts below.