SHYAMLAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred against the order dtd. 5/2/1996, passed by the learned Special Judge for Essential Commodities Act, Jalore (hereinafter referred to as 'learned Special Judge') convicting the appellant for the offence under Sec. 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1955').

(2.) While maintaining that the appellant has been wrongly convicted by the learned Special Judge, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that even if the conviction on merit is not interfered with, the sentence awarded to the appellant be modified to the extent of the sentence undergone.

(3.) Learned Counsel submitted that a period of more than 40 years has since passed, when the alleged breach took place and that a period of about 30 years has since passed when the appellant was convicted and argued that pendency of case for 30 years itself is a punishment.