SILAK RAM Vs. HARYANA STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Silak Ram appellant stands convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I) (Special Judge under the Essential Commodities Act), Faridabad under Sec. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter for short 'the Act'), vide impugned judgment dated 14.8.1992 and has been sentenced to undergo RI for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00; in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month.

(2.) The allegation against the appellant is that he was employed as a Manager of a gas agency known as M/s. Surya Gas Agency near capital bus stand Ballabgarh, which was the distributor of H.P. Liquefied Petroleum Gas in Ballabgarh town. One Anil Kumar son of Shital Prasad Jain had booked a gas connection with the aforesaid agency and later on it was learnt that the said connection had already been issued to one Anil Kumar son of Godhraj. A complaint was made in this regard and after holding an inquiry into the matter by the concerned official of District Food and Supplies Department, Faridabad, it revealed that M/s. Surya Gas Agency had sent an intimation of maturity of gas connection to Anil Kumar under UPC but it was received back unserved and thereafter, on filing of an affidavit by one Anil Kumar son of Godhraj, the connection of LPG was released. The allegations were that the present appellant, who was employed as a Manager had connived with the aforesaid Anil Kumar son of Godhraj and without verifying his address, had released the gas connection. He was consequently challaned and charged under Sec. 7 of the Act and under Sec. 420 Indian Penal Code as well. He is, however, acquitted of the offence punishable under Sec. 420 Indian Penal Code, whereas stands convicted under Sec. 7 of the Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant does not assail the impugned judgment on merits and confines his arguments with regard to quantum of sentence only submitting that the appellant has already suffered the agony of protracted trial of long 21 years; that he has been convicted for an irregularity committed by him and has been sentenced for three months only and that his case calls for a lenient view.