STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAMA MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of criminal revision petitions Nos. 60, 61 and 62 of 1969.

(2.) THE police had put up three separate challans, under Section 7, read with Section 8 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, against the respondent. The case for the prosecution was that Shri Kabul Singh, Inspector of Civil Supplies Department. Dharamsala, had, on the 19th October, 1967, raided the premises of Kishan Chand and Tej Ram situated in village Mitli and the premises of Kalu Bam in village Shekhpur and had recovered 75 bags of rice and 25 bags of gram from the premises of Kishan Chand; 75 bags of rice, 25 bags of gram and 28 bags of wheat from the premises. of Tej Bam and 50 bags of rice, 60 bags of gram and 15 bags of white gram from the premises of Kalu Ram. According to the prosecution, the aforesaid foodgrains had been stored by the respondent without a licence, as required by the Punjab Foodgrains Dealers' Licencing Order, 1964 and the Punjab Rice Dealers' Licencing Order, 1964. The respondent was prosecuted for the contravention of the provisions of the aforesaid two orders and three separate challans were put against him.

(3.) THE respondent had appeared in the three cases before the Magistrate first class on 20th May, 1968. The Magistrate first class had explained the accusation levelled against the respondent. The respondent had made the following statement: I plead guilty, It is correct that I had in fact purchased 854 bags of foodgrains consisting of 200 bags of rice, 111 bags of black gram, 15 bags of white gram and 28 bags of wheat for sale on 18-10-1967 which I had stored at three different places taken on rent. . . . The Food and Supplies Inspector raided that place on 19-10-1967 and sealed the same. Subsequently the Police took into possession the entire stock. I had applied for requisite licence for carrying on the business as Foodgrains Dealer, about 8 days before the purchase of the stock, which I had purchased in anticipation of the grant of that licence. I was under the impression that only the sale of foodgrains was prohibited by law and not its purchase, I, accordingly, made no sale nor did I intend to make any sale till the grant of licence. The stock remained in Police custody right from 19. 10-1967 till 16. 5-1968 when I received it back on Superdari. During this period the entire stock, especially the gram has been highly damaged as also reduced in quantity. It has depreciated by about 50 per cent in value. I have already suffered loss of over Rs. 20,000 in this transaction.