RAJGRJHI RAUT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the judgment dated 28.7.1992 and order dated 29.7.1992 passed by Sri Moti Lal Hasdah, the then Special Judge, (E.C. Act) West Champaran at Bettiah passed in G.R. No. 1720/86 corresponding to T.R. No. 23 of 1989 arising out of Manjhaulia PS. Case No. 105 of 1986, the sole appellant, Rajgrihi Raut, has preferred this appeal. By the impugned judgment the appellant has been found guilty of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the "E.C. Act") for violation of condition nos. 5(1) and 9 of the license issued to him under Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1977 and has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months.

(2.) IT appears that informant Vidyanand Jha, the Supply Inspector, alongwith the Block Supply Officer inspected the shop premises of the accused on 21.12.1986 at about 8.45 A.M. and found that the shopkeeper, namely, Rajgrihi Raut, a licensee dealer under the Public Distribution System, had not displayed the price and stock on the Board. On verification of the stock in the shop, stock of sugar and kerosene oil was found to be nil and no other material was available in stock. The accused is said to have produced the stock as also sale register of kerosene oil and sale register of sugar. He also produced cash memoes in three volumes which were used upto 28.11.1986. However, he did not produce the stock register of sugar notwithstanding a demand being made therefor and a suspicion arose that the sugar had been sold somewhere. On inquiry the accused is said to have stated that he had not lifted kerosene oil and sugar in the current month i.e. December 1986 on which the informant contacted the wholesale dealer M/s Gupta Trading Company and found that the accused had been supplied 8 quintals of sugar on 17.12.1986. The informant and the Block Supply Officer also inspected the register of M/s Gupta Trading Company and found that the accused had lifted 8 quintals of sugar on 17.12.1986 and in token of the same he had put his signature on the receipt book of the wholesale dealer but his signature appeared to be different from his signature which he made on seizure list etc. It is further said that the description of Rajgrihi Raut as furnished by the wholesale dealer tallied with Maharaj Raut the son of Rajgrihi Raut and accordingly it was concluded that Maharaj Raut had lifted sugar in the name of his father and had assisted his father in selling the sugar in black market. The informant is said to have seized the registers and the papers produced by the accused under a seizure list.

(3.) THE learned Special Judge having considered the materials available on record and on hearing the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties came to the conclusion that the charge of violating the Bihar Essential Articles (Display of Price and Stock) Order, 1977 had failed as no sanction of concerned authority for prosecution as required under Clause (6) of the said Order had been obtained. The Special Judge further found Maharaj Raut not guilty of the offence under the E.C. Act as also the Unification Order and acquitted him of the same. However, the appellant herein was held to be guilty as stated above and sentenced accordingly.