D.P. Singh, J.

1. The appellants have been found guilty for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for violation of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for six months as well as to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month passed in Barhi Police Station Case No. 213 of 1992, G.R. No. 2428 of 1992, by Special Judge (E.C. Act), Hazaribagh.

2. The brief facts leading to their conviction are that in the evening of 4th November, 1992, the informant was on patrolling duty, when he received information that one vehicle bearing No. BPM-1792 was carrying nine bags of sugar for black marketing to Telaiya. The informant accordingly informed his superiors and chased the vehicle going from Barhi Chowk to Telaiya in police jeep. It is further stated that the police intercepted the said jeep being driven by appellant Sirazuddin, loaded with nine bags of sugar for which he has no valid documents. The informant knew from the driver of the jeep that appellant Prakash Prasad Barnwal has purchased the said bags of sugar from appellant Jageshwar Modi, who was lifted the same for its distribution through PDS shop at Guriyo. In the meantime, appellant Prakash Prasad Barnwal was seen reaching there on a TVS Suzuki motorcycle bearing Registration No. BEM-186. The police tried to arrest the said appellant, but he managed to flee away leaving his motorcycle near the jeep.

3. Thereafter police seized the vehicles along with nine bags of sugar and got a seizure list prepared in presence of two witnesses, namely, Vinod Kumar Gupta (PW-2) and Akhilesh Kumar (PW-3). Later on, the matter was reported by the informant to Officer-in-Charge of Barhi Police Station in writing, on which Barhi Police Station Case No. 213 of 1992 was registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act against all the appellants including the owner of the jeep. The police submitted charge-sheet against four accused persons including the appellants under Section 7 of the said Act, but the appellants claimed to be innocent. The trial Court after examining the witnesses found these appellants guilty for the offences mentioned above and acquitted the owner of the vehicle Wajida Khatoon.

4. This appeal has been preferred on the grounds that the entire prosecution case was based on surmises and conjectures. It is also asserted that no provision of Essential Commodities Act has been violated just for the lapses on the part of the appellants that at the time of seizure, supporting documents could not be produced before the police. The memo of appeal further mentioned that the learned lower Court has committed error on records and wrongly convicted the appellants.

5. Mr. S.L. Barnwal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants contended these points before this Court and submitted that it is a settled principle of law that even on absence of valid papers for carrying the control items, offence could not be made out without proving that actually the consignment was being transported for the purpose of black marketing. He has pointedly stressed that the police has not mentioned in any way that nine bags of sugar were not accounted by appellant Jageshwar Modi, who has lifted the sugar for distribution at his PDS shop at Guriyo. According to them, the vehicle carrying the said sugar was intercepted by the police just to harass appellants as he was the purchaser of the lifted sugar, which has come on record, on the basis of the statement of the driver of the vehicle. It is further submitted that the said seized sugar was later on found not liable for con fiscation by the Secretary, Food, Supply and Commerce Department, Bihar and a document was filed before the lower Court in defence.

6. Learned APP for the State opposed the contention on the grounds that the vehicle carrying nine bags of sugar was seized by the polic