[2025:RJ-JD:30725]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 5/1998 Arjun Ram S/o Girdhariram, Resident of Chandon Ki Dhani, Police Station Sindhai, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

----Appellant Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumbhat Mr. Sheetal Kumbhat Mr. Naman Bhansali For Respondent(s) : Mr. P.K. Bhati, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Order

14/07/2025 Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 11.12.1997 passed by learned Special Court, Essential Commodities Act (District And Sessions Judge), Balotra in Session Case No.01/1997 by which the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as under :-

Offence	Sentence	Fine	Sentence in default of fine
7(1)(A)(ii) R/w 3 of Essential Commodities Act	6 months’ SI	Rs.1000/ -	1 month’s SI

Brief facts of the case are that the on 11.07.1996, District Supply Officer inspected the fair price shop of the present appellant and found irregularities in maintaining the stock register and no record of levy sugar in register as well as the monthly statements were not sent to the concerned authorities. With regards to the said inspection, Sampat Raj Vadera, Enforcement Inspector, lodged an FIR before the concerned Police Station. After investigation, Police filed a negative Final Report, upon which the Enforcement Officer filed a protest petition before the concerned trial court. Thereafter, learned trial court took congizance against the appellant for offence under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 08 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of the accused appellant was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 11.12.1997 convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 7(1)(A)(ii) R/w Section 3 of Essential Commodities Act. Hence, this criminal appeal.

At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 1996 and the accused appellant have so far suffered a sentence for period of nine days including remission, out of total sentence of six months’ S.I., therefore, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellant nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.

I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the trial court regarding conviction of the accused-appellant.

Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 1996 and, the appellant has so far undergone for certain period of incarceration including remission, out of total sentence of six months’ S.I., and has also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the facts that the appellant has remained behind the bars for a period of nine days, it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Section 7(1)(A)(ii) R/w Section 3 of Essential Commodities Act is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant.

Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the appellant’s conviction for offence under Section 7(1)(A)(ii) R/w Section 3 of Essential Commodities Act, the sentence awarded to them for the said offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The fine amount imposed by the Court below is hereby waived if not already deposited by the appellant. Appellant is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document