RAKESH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforesaid revision petitions have been filed against concurrent orders of conviction whereby both the petitioners were convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for violation of Section 7 and under Section 19 of the Fertiliser(Control) Order,1985 and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine,to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. Since both the cases have arisen out of a common FIR, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment. Facts are being taken from CRR No.1603 of 2014.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Chief Agricultural Officer, Gurdaspur wrote a letter to SSP Gurdaspur on 30.09.2005 for registration of a case under the aforesaid Sections against M/s Mohinder Feed Store, Dhibber Gharat, Mamoon, Tehsil Pathankot, Distsrict Gurdaspur and against M/s Raswan Khad and Feed Store, Pangoli Chowk, Pathankot, District Gurdaspur. On 9.12.2004 Agricultural Development Officer, Pathankot and Agricultural Development Officer, Bhoa checked the premises of M/s Mohinder Feed Store and on inspection of fertiliser there were found 30 bags of DAP Sardar N-18% P2 05-46% manufactured by M/s Gujarat State Fertiliser and Chemicals Ltd. No entry to this effect was made in Dealer Registration Certificate meaning thereby that the said dealer had no right to store or sell the same. Agricultural Development Officer, Pathankot took a sample of that fertiliser for testing. One copy of the sample was given to the dealer and two copies were sent to Chief agricultural Officer, Gurdaspur for test purposes. One sample was sent to Analytical Chemist Fertiliser Quality Control Laboratory, Ludhiana and as per the report received the same was not found as per specifications. It was disclosed by owner of the firm M/s Mohinder Khad Store that the said bags were purchased from above mentioned firm M/s Raswan Khad and Feed Store whose owner Rakesh Singh stated that he had purchased the same from M/s Balwinder Singh and Sons, Mukerian. However,on inquiry M/s Gujarat State Fertiliser and Chemical Ltd. stated that the said fertiliser was not theirs. On the request of the dealer the sample was resent for retesting to Analytical Chemist Quality Control Laboratory Fertiliser, Karnal and it was declared as 'fail'. Thereafter a case was registered against the aforesaid two persons. Both the petitioners were charged under the aforesaid Sections to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as six witnesses. However,the petitioners did not lead any evidence in their defence.

(3.) After hearing arguments from both the sides, the trial Court convicted the accused-petitioners in the manner as indicated above. The appeal preferred by them against the order of conviction was also dismissed. Hence the present revision petition.