PRABHU DAYAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner in this revision which is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur dated May 3, 1986. Under the aforesaid judgment the learned Sessions Judge partly allowed the appeal filed by the accused petitioner before him and while maintaining the conviction of the accused petitioner under Sec. 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and taking into consideration the fact that the incident took place on April 1, 1974 and by the time the appeal was disposed of 12 years had already passed, reduced the sentence from 2 years rigorous imprisonment to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, or in default of payment of fine to further suffer six months' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) I need not go into the facts of the case and it is suffice to say that so far as contravention by the accused petitioner of the Rajasthan Sugar Wholesale,Dealer Licensing Order, 1967 is concerned, there is sufficient material on record that such contravention took place. There can be no dispute that the incident took place in 1974 and therefore a period of more than 15 years have already elapsed since the commission of the offence. When the offence was committed by the accused petitioner under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Sec. 7 of the EC Act as then stood, the court had powers for any adequate reasons to impose sentence less than three months in case there was contravention of any order made with reference to clauses other than clauses (h) and (i) of Sub-section (2) of Sec. 7 of the EC Act. The accused petitioner has already undergone 4 to 5 days imprisonment and taking into consideration the fact that the occurrence took place more than 15 years ago, I am of the opinion that the sentence already undergone and a fine as ordered by the learned Sessions Judge shall meet the ends of justice.