HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) ACCUSED Lakhmichand, Chandmal, Manaklal and Prabhulal were found to carry 8 bags of wheat in a bullock cart on 23-3-1951 from Borkhedi in Madhya Bharat to Bangeda in Rajasthan. The cart was stopped as soon as it stepped out of Madhya Bharat territory. Lakhmiehand and Chandmal were arrested on the spot and the other two escaped. A complaint was lodged against the accused on these facts under Sections 4 and 8 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act. The complaint however did not mention the particular Notification under the Madhya Bharat Foodgrains Export Restrictions Order, Samvat 2005 (1948) issued by the Government of Madhya Bharat in pursuance of the powers conferred under the stud Act. Chandmal was discharged on 5-6-1951 on the ground that no case was made out against him. Charges were however framed against the remaining three accused.
(2.) ON trial the learned Magistrate held that it was proved that the bullock containing 8 bags of wheat had been carried from Borkhedi in Madhya Bharat to Bangeda in Rajasthan. He however felt doubt as to whether Manaklal and Prabhulai were inside the cart at the time the offence is said to have been committed. He therefore acquitted them.
(3.) AS regards Lakhmichand he held that although it was proved that he was inside the cart and that the wheat was being taken as indicated above by him yet inasmuch as the complaint did not mention the particular notification which is said to have been contravened the cognizance taken by the Magistrate was bad in law being contrary to Section 11 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, He therefore directed the acquittal of Lakhmichand also.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.