IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J.
Nemai Chandra Majumder - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A No. 237 of 1984
Decided On : 13-04-2022
Essential Commodities - Conviction under Essential Commodities Act - 7(1)(a)(i) - West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977 - [7(1)(a)(i)] - [West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977] - The court discussed the violation of the Essential Commodities Act and the West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977. It highlighted the lack of stock-cum-price board and stock register, and the storage of essential food material without proper documentation. The court also emphasized the absence of evidence regarding the purchase and sale of rice, leading to the conclusion that the accused did not violate the provisions of the licensing order regarding rice. The judgment modified the substantive sentence and upheld the order of confiscation of the seized food articles.
Fact of the Case:
On 06.02.1984, a raid and search of the appellant's grocery shop led to the seizure of various essential commodities without proper documentation. The appellant was convicted under section 7(1)(a)(i) of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and a fine.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of violating the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act and the West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977. It also concluded that the appellant did not violate the provisions of the licensing order regarding rice. The substantive sentence was modified, and the order of confiscation of the seized food articles was upheld.
Issues: Violation of Essential Commodities Act, compliance with West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977, absence of proper documentation for stored essential commodities, and the legality of the seizure procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant violated the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act by storing essential food material without proper documentation. It also emphasized the lack of evidence regarding the purchase and sale of rice, leading to the conclusion that the appellant did not violate the provisions of the licensing order regarding rice. The court found no illegality in the seizure procedure.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed in part by modifying the substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment and upholding the order of confiscation of the seized food articles.
JUDGMENT
ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J. - This appeal has been filed by the convict appellant under section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure assailing the judgment and order dated 15.05.1984 passed by Learned Judge, Special Court (Essential Commodities act), Nadia, Krishnanagar in E.C. Case No. 10 of 1984, wherein the appellant was convicted for the offence under section 7(1)(a)(i) of the Essential Commodities act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 days and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days and forfeiture of the grocery articles seized from the petitioner's shop.
2. The fact of the case in brief is that on 06.02.1984 one Harendra Kumar Bose, DEO, Karimpur accompanied by police held a raid and search of the grocery shop of the appellant at Debnathpur, P.S. Tehatta, District- Nadia and seized 560 kgs. of salt, 40 kgs. of flour, 40 kgs. of atta, 15 kgs. of mung dal, 15 kgs. of mustard oil. The Search and seizure was conducted without disclosing any reason to the appellant. Police Officer also arrested the petitioner.
3. a complaint was lodged by Harendra Kumar Bose/D.E.O against the appellant, alleging that the accused did not display the stock-cum-price list Board, in the shop as required under para 3(1) of West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977. He could neither produce any stock and sale register nor any document relating to purchase and sale of grocery. after investigation police submitted a Charge Sheet against the accused appellant under section 7 (1) of Essential Commodities act for violation of WBDSP Essential Commodities Order, 1977. The appellant was examined under section 251 of Cr. P.C. to the effect that on 06.02.1984 when the search party entered into his shop, he did not maintain stock register, sale register and stock-cum-price board. The accused/ appellant pleaded not guilty. a summary proceeding was carried out against the accused for violation of section 3(2)(i) of Essential Commodities act and thereby committing an offence under section 7(1)(a)(i) of Essential Commodities act. Prosecution examined Sudhir Biswas as PW-1, anil Kirtania as PW-2, ajit Kumar Mondal as PW-3, Saidullah Sheikh as PW-4, Kanti Bhusan Nath as PW-5, H.K. Bose, the de facto complainant as PW-6 Mr. Dulal Chatterjee, SI of Police DEB (IO) as PW-7. Documents were produced as Exhibits. The accused person was examined under section 313 of Cr. P.C. He admitted that on 06.02.1983, H.K Bose, inspected his grocery shop at Debmathpur in presence of other witnesses. He also admitted that in the shop rice, atta, flour, salt and different variety of dal, soap, mustard oil, rapeseed oil and coconut oil were stored for sale. The accused however claimed that there was a stock Board but had no licence for selling of rice as he did not sell rice. No defense witness was examine.
4. after considering the evidence on record Learned Judge, Special Court held that at the time of search and seizure the accused petitioner was not found selling of rice. Therefore, the accused did not violate any provision of licensing order regarding rice. The Trial Court held that the accused violated West Bengal Declaration of stocks and price of Essential Commodities Order, 1977 which was promulgated in terms with section 3(2)(i) of Essential Commodities act and the accused was found guilty of the offence under section 7(1)(a)(i) of Essential Commodities act.
5. after considering the facts and circumstances and all aspects the accused was convicted for the offence and he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 days and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. The judgment passed by the court below reveals that the accused was in custody in this case from 07.02.1984 to 13.02.1984 and the period of detention was set off from the substantive sentence.
6. The seized articles like 5.60 quintals of salt, 40 kgs. of flour, 40 kgs. of atta, 15 k
The central legal point established in the judgment is the violation of the Essential Commodities Act and the West Bengal Declaration of stocks and prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977, due to....
Strict adherence to statutory requirements under the Essential Commodities Act is essential for lawful operation, and failure to comply can lead to conviction.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt is required for conviction under the Essential Commodities Act, and mere assumptions or procedural lapses invalidate the prosecution's case.
Prosecution must establish seizure of commodities with clear evidence; failure to weigh goods and inconsistent witness testimonies negate conviction under Essential Commodities Act.
Burden of proof on the accused to explain possession of essential commodities; conviction set aside due to doubt in prosecution's case regarding ownership.
Reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case and the lack of conclusive evidence led to the acquittal of the appellant.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.