LAWS(P&H)-2004-7-82

RAJENDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On July 28, 2004
RAJENDER Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJENDER son of Rati Ram appellant stands convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1975 (for short 'the Act') vide impugned judgment dated 15.10.1993 passed by learned Special Judge, Bhiwani and has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, he has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) THE accusation against the appellant is that he had kept in his conscious possession 178 bags of wheat weighing 169 quintals 61 kgs for sale without obtaining any permit or licence from the State. In short the case of the prosecution is that on 29.5.1992, R.K. Mehra, Assistant Food and Supply Officer in the company of other officers including ASI Satbir Singh had raided the shop of the appellant situated in Sarai Chopta Bhiwani and the aforesaid quantity of wheat was recovered from his shop. Since the appellant had committed the breach of Govt. Notification dated 22.11.1985 prohibiting the storage of wheat beyond 25 quintals, he was charged under Section 7 of the Act read with Section 3 of the Haryana Food Articles (Licensing and Price Control) Order, 1985.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant does not join any issue on merits and without assailing the impugned judgment, at the very outset prays for reduction in the quantum of sentence. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel contends that the present case relates to the year 1992 and by now the appellant has faced the rigor of protracted trial of about 12 years. It is then contended that the appellant is not previous convict and as such he deserves lenient view so far as quantum of sentence is concerned. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon two judgments of this Court rendered in Sant Lal v. State of Haryana, 1999(2) RCR(Crl.) 563 (P&H) : 1999(2) All India Criminal Law Reporter 652, Niranjan and another v. State of Haryana, 1994(2) RCR(Crl.) 620 (P&H) : 1992(3) Crimes 1069 and another judgment of this Court rendered in Satinder Singh v. Punjab State, 2003(4) RCR(Crl.) 616 (P&H) : Criminal Appeal 293-SB of 1991 decided on 24.9.2003, and prays for the benefit of probation.