SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Cal) 49

N.C.MUKHERJI, MONOJ KUMAR MUKHERJEE
SHEW RANJAN PROSAD SHAW – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

Monoj Kumar Mukherjee, J. :- The short question of law that falls for determination in this Rule is whether the petitioner is a dealer within the meaning of paragraph 2(a) of the West Bengal. Declaration of Stock and Price of Essential Commodities Order, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Order). The question arises in this way.

2. On may 25, 1973 some officers of the District Engorgement Branch raided the godown of the petitioner and found a stock of 20 quintals of pulses (Maskalat) in 20 gunny bags but no list indicating the opening stock of such commodity and retail selling price thereof was displayed as required under paragraph 3 of the Order. The petitioner, on demand, also failed to produce books of accounts in respect of the said commodity. A prosecution was launched against him under Rule 114 of the Defence of India Rules 1971 for violating the provisions of paragraph 3 of the Order. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Cooch Behar, who tried the case, found the petitioner guilty and convicted and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one months and a fine of Rs. 200 in default to rigorous imprisonment for 15 days more. The petitioner therefore moved th










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top