IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove possession and compliance with legal procedures beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under the Essential Commodities Act.

JUDGMENT :

(Partha Sarathi Sen, J.) :

1. In this appeal the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 18.05.1992 as passed by learned Judge, Special Court (E.C. Act), Howrah in S.C.T. case No. 57 of 1988 has been assailed. By the impugned judgment the learned trial court found the accused, Murari Mohan Das guilty under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the said ‘Act’) and thus sentenced the said accused to suffer R.I. for three months and to pay fine of Rs., 1.000/-i.d. to suffer further imprisonment of 15 days.

2. The accused felt aggrieved and preferred the instant appeal.

3. In support of the instant appeal Ms. Priyadarshee, learned amicus curiae who has been appointed by this Court to argue on behalf of the appellant at the very outset draws attention of this Court to the written complaint as lodged in this case. Attention of this Court is also drawn to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. It is argued on behalf of the appellant that from the deposition of the prosecution witnesses more specifically from the evidence of P.W. 2 it would reveal that proper procedure was not followed while seizure of the alleged rapeseed oil inasmuch as the said P.W. 2 in course of this testimony categorically stated that neither the gunny bags containing the oil tins nor the seized oil tins were labeled at the time of the seizure.

4. Drawing attention to the deposition of P.W. 3 it is submitted that the said P.W. 3 though according to the prosecution is a seizure witness but he at the time of his deposition turned hostile and even then his evidence cannot be thrown away since from his cross-examination it would reveal that the two bottles of rapeseed oil was not seized and/or recovered from the possession of the accused and on the contrary the same was found inside some bushy bamboo clump beside the road.

5. It is further submitted on behalf of the appellant that time of alleged seizure of the said two bottles of rapeseed oil is doubtful in view of the fact that two seizure list witnesses, namely, P.W.s 2 and 3 in their respective depositions have stated different time of seizure that is to say P.W. 2 stated that the two bottles of rapeseed oil was found to be in possession of the accused at 6.30 p.m. while P.W. 3 in his deposition stated that it was at 8.00 p.m. It is further submitted on behalf of the appellant that while passing the impugned judgment learned trial court has failed to visualize such contradiction which materially affects the genuineness of the prosecution case. It is further submitted that learned trial court though recorded that the said two bottles of rapeseed oil were disposed of by the order of the Collector but no such paper has been exhibited on behalf of the prosecution to substantiate the contention of the prosecution. It is thus submitted that it is a fit case for allowing the instant appeal by setting aside the order impugned.

6. Ms. Faria Hossain, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, contends that from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses; both oral and documentary it would reveal that the charges against the accused have been proved in accordance with law and, therefore, there is no justification to interfere with the judgment which has been assailed in this appeal.

7. This Court has meticulously perused the entire materials as placed before this Court. This Court has given its anxious consideration over the submissions of the learned Advocate for the contending parties.

8. For effective disposal of the instant appeal the facts leading to initiation of S.C.T. case No. 57 of 1988 is required to be dealt with in a nut shell.

9. On 31.03.1988 the Officer-in-Charge, Shyampur Police Station received a written complaint from the informant to the effect that on 24.03.1988 at about 18.00 hours one Gunadhar Dhara, one Sukumar Maji, one Ranjit Dhar and some others of Village – Kamina detained one Murari Mohan Das (the app