Back
2016 Supreme(Tri) 415
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
S. TALAPATRA, J.
Sri Kajal Kumar Sarkar, son of Sri Prafulla Sarkar of Netaji Palli - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tripura - Respondent
CRL. REV. P. No.22 of 2015
Decided on : 30-11-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. P. Saha, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. R.C. Debnath, Addl. P.P.
The absence of substantive evidence regarding ownership and possession can lead to acquittal based on the benefit of doubt.
Headnote:
Seizure - Essential Commodities Act - 1955, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000 - Section 7(1)(c), Section 7(1)(ii), Section 3 - The court discussed the seizure of LPG cylinders from the petitioner's house and the contravention of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000. The absence of substantive evidence regarding the ownership of the place of storage led to the petitioner's acquittal based on the benefit of doubt.
Fact of the Case:
Officials raided the petitioner's house based on a secret information and seized 15 LPG cylinders. The petitioner was convicted under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for unauthorized storing of LPC cylinders. The petitioner appealed the judgment and order, which was dismissed by the Sessions Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no substantive evidence to establish the ownership of the place of storage and the recovery of the cylinders from the petitioner's possession. As a result, the petitioner was acquitted based on the benefit of doubt.
Issues: The key issue was whether the place of storage belonged to the petitioner and whether the petitioner stored the cylinders in contravention of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000.
Ratio Decidendi: The absence of substantive evidence regarding the ownership of the place of storage and the recovery of the cylinders from the petitioner's possession led to the petitioner's acquittal based on the benefit of doubt.
Final Decision: The impugned judgment and order were set aside, and the petitioner was acquitted from the charge.
This petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.03.2015 delivered in Criminal Appeal No.54 of 2014 by the Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala.
2. The fact that would be essential for appreciating the challenge may be introduced at the outset.
On 13.06.2012, the officials of the Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, namely Manik Chandra Saha, Assistant Director (Food), Sri Partha Sarathi Bhattacharji, Inspector (Food) [PW5], Sri Basab Bhattacharji Inspector (Food), [PW4] alongwith Dr. Reshmi Das, Deputy Collector and Magistrate, Sadar raided the house of the petitioner at Netaji Colony, Ichabazar, West Dukli based on a secret information that some domestic LPG filled cylinders were stored in the house of the petitioner unauthorizedly. 15(fifteen) Nos. cylinders bearing Nos.SR 052361 S, SR 451770 R, SR 120953 S, SR 294696 S, SR 604770 T, SR 320832 T, SR 278094 T, SR 476929 S, SR 037225 S, SR 538081 T, SR 029474 S, SR 598673 S, SR 021632 S, SR 536828 T, SR 027688 S were found during the search and those were seized by preparing a seizure list [Exbt.2] by Sri Subarata Saha, Inspector (Food) [PW3] in presence of the local witnesses including Sri Chitta Das [PW2]. The storage was without any authority as the petitioner was neither a distributor nor could he have stored all these 15 Nos. of filled LPG cylinders as the consumer and hence, he was alleged to have violated the Clause 7(1)(c) of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000 which provides as under:
“7(1)(c) : possess filled or empty cylinder, gas cylinder valve or pressure regulator, unless he is a distributor or a consumer.”
3. After seizure, those seized cylinders were kept in M/S. Satya Narayan Gas Agency on obtaining a ‘Zimmanama’ [Exbt.1]. The said zimmanama was authenticated by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Agartala, West Tripura on 09.01.2013. One Sri Laxman Bhowmik [PW1] received those seized cylinders for M/S Satya Narayan Gas Agency. Before the seized cylinders were allowed to be kept by PW1, Sri Subrata Saha [PW3] lodged a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge, West Agartala Police Station informing the seizure and contravention of the said order. The contravention constitutes offence punishable under Section 7(1) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as the control order was made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. After the investigation, the police filed the final police report chargesheeting the petitioner and accordingly, on taking cognizance of the offence, the charge was framed against the petitioner under Section 7(1)(a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for unauthorized storing of LPC cylinders. The petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed to face the trial.
4. In order to substantiate the charge, the prosecution adduced as many as 6(six) witnesses and introduced 2(two) documentary evidence including the said zimmanama [Exbt.1] and the seizure list dated 13.06.2012 as prepared by PW3[Exbt.2].
After recording the evidence led by the prosecution, the petitioner was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. when he had taken a plea that he was implicated in the said case falsely. Thereafter, having appreciated the evidence, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Agartala, West Tripura by his judgment and order dated 11.08.2014 convicted the petitioner under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and sentenced him to suffer minimum statutory rigorous imprisonment for 3(three) months with fine of Rs.1,000/(Rupees One thousand), in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment of 15(fifteen) days.
5. Being aggrieved by that judgment and order dated 11.08.2014, the petitioner filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.54 of 2014 in the court of the Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala. By way of affirmance, the said appeal was
