SUBHASH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE charge against Subhash Chander son of Bahadur Chand partner M/s Subhash Chander Satish Kumar. Nilokheri is that he had 173 bags of levy cement, for sale in his possession, although his firm had licence only to deal with non levy cement. He was further charged that the accounts were not properly, maintained as required under the licence. He was prosecuted and the Special Court, Kamal, found him guilty under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and sentenced him to four months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further R.I. for two months, vide his order dated 14.5.1985. Feeling aggrieved, he has filed this appeal, Jagjit Singh son of Sohan Singh, a Government contractor was also prosecuted along with the appellant, but he was acquitted.

(2.) S .K. Sahi, Assistant Food, and supplies Officer, Panipat, (PW3) and sub-inspector Raj Pal Singh (PW5) raided the premises of the appellant on 4.6.1984 at 6.30 P.M. 173 bags of cement with markings J.K. Cement Works Nimbahera-Rajasthan-levy were recovered. Besides the said cement bags stock register, Exhibit PG of the firm containing entries upto 25.5.1984 only was also taken into possession. As Subash Chander appellant could not produce any documents, permit or order showing that his firm could deal in levy cement the police took 173 bags of the cement into possession. The stock register Exhibit PG and licence Exhibit PH were also taken into possession. As the appellant was not maintaining proper accounts for the sale of cement which he was bound to maintain under law and he was found to be in possession of levy cement for which he had no licence, he was arrested and after investigation challaned under Section 7, of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The infringement of Haryana Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973, was also made out against him.

(3.) AFTER the close of the prosecution, the appellant was examined under Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code, where he had taken the stand that he does not work on the shop and his father manages the business. No recovery or raid was made in his presence nor he was joined in the investigation and this case has been planted upon him at the instance of a rival shopkeeper. In his defence, he has examined Manohar Lal Draftsman, (DW1) who has prepared the plan Exhibit DL showing the location of the shop, Karhmiri Lal (DW2) an octroi moharar, who has proved that on 28.3.1984, two truck loads of cement had entered Nilokheri through his octroi post. The said trucks contained 240 bags of cement, each. Bharat Bhushan (DW3) has stated that his office and shop is situated adjacent to the shop of the appellant. Bahadur Chand, father of the appellant runs the business and he had never seen Subhash Chander appellant on the shop. Hardeep Singh (DW4) who is the cashier of Gurdwara Nilokheri, has deposed that a shop of the Gurdwara is on rent with Bahadur Chand, who is a tenant. The appellant is not a tenant. Jaswant Singh (DW5) of village Ramba has deposed that appellant resides at village Ramba and does cultivation. He had issued Chuhla tax receipt. According to Jaswant Singh, Bahadur Chand resides at Nilokheri and works there. Vinod Kumar (DW6) is a shopkeeper of Yamunanagar. He has stated that a circular was received to the effect that old gunny bags would be used for non-levy cement by the factory.