GOTAM LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr. Kashinath Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Mathur Public Prosecutor along with the Enforcement Inspector.

(2.) The case of the prosecution was that Girdharilal and Ramchandra were fair price shop dealers. They obtained certain quantity of wheat under permits dated August 14, 1986 and August 20, 1986 from Scheduled Tribes Corporation, Udaipur and instead of distributing the food grains at the fair price shop sold these to firm Lalchand Kapurchand at Rs. 75/- per quintal. The goods were seized when these were being unloaded at the shop of Motilal and Kistoorchand. It was alleged that Gautamlal was also present at that time.

(3.) The Special Judge Essential Commodities Act, Jodhpur by his order dated May 2, 1987 discharged Kistoorchand Girdharilal and Ramchandra. However, he came to the conclusion that charge should be framed against Motilal and Gautamlal under section 3 read with section 7 and section 8 of the Essential Commodities Act. Both Gautamlal and Motilal have filed Revisions Nos. 125 and 135 of 1987 against the order of the Special Judge. It was contended by Mr. Kashi Nath Joshi appearing on behalf of both the petitioners that admittedly the fair price shop dealers were Girdharilal and Ramchandra and both of them have been discharged by the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Jodhpur. It was argued that even if the case of the prosecution is taken to be correct, it were Girdharilal and Ramchandra who had violated the Rajasthan Food grains and other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976 and not the petitioners. Both Girdharilal and Ramchandra have been discharged by the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act. Jodhpur and no charge could be framed against the petitioners for the above offence. It was also pointed out that section 7 provides punishment for contravention of any Order issued under the Essential Commodities Act. In the order of the Special Judge it has nowhere been pointed out that the petitioners have contravened the provisions or any Order issued by the Government under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act.