NIRANJAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was tried for an offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act on the allegations that he had been selling rationed sugar and kerosene to the consumers at higher prices. Vide judgment and order dated 29.5.1998/2.6.1998 learned Special Judge, Faridabad acquitted him of the above allegations but convicted him for the aforementioned offence as he did not maintain the account books (sales register and stock register) properly and, thus, contravened the provisions of Clause 9 of the Haryana Prevention of Hoarding and Maintenance of Quality Control Order, 1977. Aggrieved of his conviction and sentence, the appellant filed the present appeal.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction of his client. However, he has submitted that the offence relates to the year 1995 when FIR No. 120 dated 10.5.1995 was registered against him. At that time, the appellant was 46 years of age as is clear from the heading of the impugned judgment. Ever since then, he has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution. He has already deposited the fine on 2.6.1998. Therefore, the sentence of the appellant be reduced.

(3.) Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the appellant by submitting that the facts and circumstances of the case warrant awarding of deterrent punishment to the appellant.