BIRBAL PRASAD AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment dated 13.1.1989 passed by the Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court, Sambalpur in T.R. No. 48 of 1987 convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo R.I. for one year for the offence under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The appellant is a retailer in essential commodities at Naktideul in the district of Sambalpur. He was prosecuted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, in short, "the Act" for violation of Clause 3 of the Pulses, Edible Oilseeds and Edible Oils (Storage Control) Order, 1977, in short, "Control Order 1977" and Clause 3 of the Orissa Declaration of Stock and Price of Essential Commodities Order, 1973. According to the prosecution allegation, the officials of the Supply Department visited the business premises of the appellant on 1.11.1987 and found that he had stock of pulses, edible oilseeds and edible oils of different quantities in his premises, but had no licence for dealing in such commodities. He had also not displayed the stock and price board as required under Clause 3 of the Orissa Declaration of Stock and Price of Essential Commodities Order, 1973, in short, "Declaration Order, 1973". The supply officials, therefore, seized the stock of essential commodities, the stock and price board from the shop of the appellant, gave those articles in zima of the appellant, recorded the statement of the appellant, and lodged the F.I.R. in Naktideul Police Station. The investigation on that F.I.R. ultimately resulted in the prosecution of the appellant.

(3.) The appellant in his defence, took the plea that being a petty retailer, he was not required to have any licence under the Control Order, 1977. His further plea was that he was not required to display any price and stock board in the godown wherefrom the seizure of the commodities was made.