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

1950 Supreme(All) 234

HARISH CHANDRA
KAMLA KANT MISRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.KIRTY, B.UPADHYAY, G.S.PATHAK, R.MITRA

HARISH CHANDRA, J.


( 1 ) THE applicant is the manager of the Badal Ram Lakshami Narain Oil Mills at Banaras and has been convicted under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 (XXIV [24] of 1946) for committing a breach of the provisions of the U. P. Oil Seeds and Oil Seeds Products control Order, 1945, inasmuch as a large stock of linseed oil-seeds received by the Mills was not entered in their registers, as it ought to have been under the conditions of the licence, for a period of nearly ten days. The trial Court sentenced the applicant to a fine of Rs. 500/-, but the lower appellate Court finding that the omission did not appear to have been dishonest and was due only to negligence or carelessness reduced the amount of the fine to Rs. 50/ -.

( 2 ) IN this Court it is argued that linseed oil-seeds not being an essential commodity as defined in section 2 of the Act, the Control Order of 1945 cannot be said to have been kept alive by Section 17 of the Act in so far as it relates to linseed oil-seeds. In a case just decided by me--Gopi krishna Malviya v. State, (Cri. Revn. No. 222 of 1950 D/- 21-8-1950) I have held that only such orders passed under the Essential










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