BAHORI Vs. STATE
LAWS(RAJ)-1967-7-2
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on July 06,1967

BAHORI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS revision application has been filed by Bahori and five others challenging their conviction under sec. 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, read with clause 3 of the Rajasthan Foodgrains (Restrictions on Border Movement) Order, 1965.
(2.) THE petitioners were arrested while they were transporting gram on the night intervening 28th and 29th March, 1965 at 1. 30 a. m. within the internal border area which falls on the border of U. P. adjoining the Bharatpur District of Rajasthan. Bags containing foodgrain and the camel on which they were being transported were seized by the police officers and the petitioners were challenged in the court of the Additional District Magistrate, Bharatpur, who by his judgment dated 17th December, 1965, found the petitioner guilty of contravening the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act read with clause 3 of the Rajasthan Foodgrains (Restrictions on Border Movement) Order, 1965, and sentenced each one of them to seven days' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 400/- or in default further undergo four days' rigorous imprisonment. THE petitioners went to the court of Sessions in revision challenging this judgment of the Additional District Magistrate, but the learned Judge dismissed their petition vide his judgment dated 10th June, 1966. It is against these two judgments that the petitioners have preferred this revision application in this Court. It is not disputed by the petitioners that they were transporting the gram within eight miles of the border of U. P. when they were caught by the police authorities. The plea taken by the accused before the learned Additional District Magistrate was that they were taking the gram to Dholpur and therefore they did not commit any offence under clause 3 of the said Order of 1965. Clause 3 of the Rajasthan Foodgrains (Restrictions on Border Movement) Order, 1965 prohibits the transport of the foodgrain to any place in the internal border area from any place outside that area or from any place in the internal border area to any other place in that area. "internal border area" has been defined by this order as the area within the State of Rajasthan lying within ten mile belt all along the border of the State adjoining the State of Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharastra and Gujarat. Clause 3 further provides that if anybody wanted to transport the foodgrain within the internal border area or wanted to carry it from a place in the internal area to any other place outside that area, then he shall be required to obtain a permit issued by the State Government or any officer authorised by the Government in that behalf. These provisions make it quite clear that nobody can transport the foodgrain from any place in the internal area to a place falling within that area or outside that area without a permit obtained from the authority appointed under the provisions of the said order. It is nowhere pleaded by the petitioners that they had a valid permit for removing the gram from the place within the "internal area" to Dholpur which definitely falls outside that area. The movement of foodgrain within the internal area without a permit obtained from the authority appointed in that behalf is prohibited and if any one moves the foodgrain within such an area for taking it to any place either within that area or outside that area then he would certainly commit an offence punishable under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. In view of this provision of the order, the plea taken by the accused that they were taking the grain to Dholpur cannot absolve them from the liability and they cannot escape the punishment under the aforementioned Act read with the Rajasthan Foodgrains (Restrictions on Border Movement) Order, 1965 for having transported gram on the backs of the camels from a place which definitely falls within the internal border area. In my opinion, a foolproof case has been made out against the petitioners. There is no force in this revision and, therefore, it is dismissed. .;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.