PARTAP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PARTAP appellants has by way of this appeal challenged his conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 500, in default further rigorous imprisonment for one month, under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act recorded by the Special Judge, vide his order dated 13th September, 1984.

(2.) THE prosecution case in short in that on 20th December, 1983, on receipt of secret information a police party headed by Ved Pakash Sub-Inspector held a nakabandi on Jind Bhiwani road. At about 12 noon they saw truck No. DHL 4110 coming from the side of Fowara Chowk and proceeding towards Bhiwani. The appellant was driving the truck. The truck was stopped and on search of the same 71 bags of rice were found. The appellant did not have any permit or licence for moving the same. Each bag weighed about 101 kg. of rice. The bags of rice and truck were taken into possession. The appellant was challanged for the violation of the order issued by the Director, Food and Supplies, Haryana, under clause 4 of the Haryana Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1979, which reads as under :-

(3.) LEAVING aside the position taken by the appellant, even if the allegations of the prosecution are taken at their face value I do not think that these amount to the contravention of the aforesaid order. It is nowhere in evidence that the appellant was a rice miller or dealer in the State of Haryana or that he moved the rice from the mill or business premises without obtaining any authorisation. The notification as it reads only bars the movement of rice by rice millers or dealers out of their mill or business premises. In this view of the matter, this appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence of the appellant are set aside. The fine, if recovered, should be refunded to the appellant. Appeal allowed.