SHER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Sec. 374 (2) of the CrPC being aggrieved of the judgment dtd. 1/3/1995 passed by the learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act and Sessions Judge, Balotara in Criminal Case No.6/1993, whereby he has been convicted for the offences under Ss. 3/7 and 3/9 of the Essential Commodities Act and for each count, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of 3 months with a fine of Rs.500.00 and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment of 1 month.

(2.) Briefly stated, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the case are that the appellant was a Fair Price Shop Dealer in Ward No.24 of the Barmer. He received sugar for distribution in the November-December 1992 and January 1993. On inspection and enquiry, it was found that there were entries of distribution of sugar in the distribution register for many persons, whereas in the ration cards of the said persons, no corresponding entries were made. For some persons, there were double entries of distribution of sugar. The Enforcement Officer after conducting enquiry found certain irregularities and errors and submitted a report in this regard at the Police Station Barmer, which was registered as FIR No.222/1993 for the offences under Sec. 3/7 and 3/9 of the Essential Commodities Act. After usual investigation, a chargesheet was submitted against the appellant.

(3.) The learned trial court framed charges against the appellant for the aforesaid offences and upon denial of guilt by him, commenced the trial. During the course of trial, as many as 9 witnesses were examined and various documents were exhibited. Thereafter, an explanation was sought from the accused-appellant under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., in which he denied the prosecution allegations and claimed to be innocent. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated above vide judgment dtd. 1/3/1995, which is under assail before this court in the instant appeal.